|
|
Post by 13thGeneral on Aug 27, 2014 17:34:14 GMT
It's not something that rests solely on one or the other, but in the end Peter is the CEO, so responsibility is ultimately his burden to bare; and he chooses to blame DeNA and the community. That's not very good leadership. His best move would to actually own up to his misteps and do his best to get the game back on track; most people would respect that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2014 17:43:51 GMT
It's not something that rests solely on one or the other, but in the end Peter is the CEO, so responsibility is ultimately his burden to bare; and he chooses to blame DeNA and the community. That's not very good leadership. His best move would to actually own up to his misteps and do his best to get the game back on track; most people would respect that. Lest we forget, he also blamed "the device".  |
|
|
|
Post by 13thGeneral on Aug 27, 2014 18:12:06 GMT
It's not something that rests solely on one or the other, but in the end Peter is the CEO, so responsibility is ultimately his burden to bare; and he chooses to blame DeNA and the community. That's not very good leadership. His best move would to actually own up to his misteps and do his best to get the game back on track; most people would respect that. Lest we forget, he also blamed "the device". Oh yeah, that too. I'm actually wondering if maybe PM is going through some sort of existential life crisis or somethiing. Just think about it; all this zen stuff, focusing on oversimplification, trying to bring people together, getting emotional over things, and seeming to confuse things he said - among several other indicators - these could all be signs he's just having some personal issues. I'm not saying he's going senile, because he doesn't display those tendancies. But his actions as of late seems to reflect the signs of exostential crisis, and would explain a lot. It kind of makes me concerned for is well being. Maybe we need to organise a support group intervention? |
|
|
|
Post by rubgish on Aug 27, 2014 18:19:30 GMT
Your statement was we had no proof of DeNA's influence - I showed you influence. Your pendantic semantics argument is completely irrelevant. Regardless of the way it was done, DeNA's influence is QUITE obvious. The way, shape or form this influence took was never specified. Making assumptions of that nature is silly. The fact that the influence was there however is undeniable. You have to be joking if you think that there isn't a difference between being forced to do something and having someone convince you that it's the right thing to do. One is willing, one is not. It's literally the only choice that matters. If Peter has been forced to go with gems for monetary reasons as part of the DeNA deal [i.e. game wouldn't have enough money to be made otherwise], then I can sympathise with that decision. It still sucks, but it's not as bad as him willingly deciding that gems are the right way to go. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2014 18:29:41 GMT
Your statement was we had no proof of DeNA's influence - I showed you influence. Your pendantic semantics argument is completely irrelevant. Regardless of the way it was done, DeNA's influence is QUITE obvious. The way, shape or form this influence took was never specified. Making assumptions of that nature is silly. The fact that the influence was there however is undeniable. You have to be joking if you think that there isn't a difference between being forced to do something and having someone convince you that it's the right thing to do. One is willing, one is not. It's literally the only choice that matters. If Peter has been forced to go with gems for monetary reasons as part of the DeNA deal [i.e. game wouldn't have enough money to be made otherwise], then I can sympathise with that decision. It still sucks, but it's not as bad as him willingly deciding that gems are the right way to go. It would be interesting to see the contract between DeNa and 22cans, especially since they were hired as a publisher, not a consultant (maybe DeNa operates as both?). In the end I would guess we will never really know what their relationship truly entailed, but after all of Peter's rambling about analytics, I would guess that DeNa basically said "here are the numbers, if you want to have a chance at making X profit, you have to coerce your player-base into spending Y per login/week/etc., and here are the mechanical hooks to do it. I'm sure it's more complicated than that, seeing these types of relationships first hand, it'd hard for me to imagine DeNa didn't have a significant influence on Peter's financial decisions regarding Godus... or at minimum, had a hand in "Opening Peter's eyes" to the cold hard facts of mobile monetization success. |
|
|
|
Post by Danjal on Aug 27, 2014 19:35:58 GMT
Your statement was we had no proof of DeNA's influence - I showed you influence. Your pendantic semantics argument is completely irrelevant. Regardless of the way it was done, DeNA's influence is QUITE obvious. The way, shape or form this influence took was never specified. Making assumptions of that nature is silly. The fact that the influence was there however is undeniable. You have to be joking if you think that there isn't a difference between being forced to do something and having someone convince you that it's the right thing to do. One is willing, one is not. It's literally the only choice that matters. If Peter has been forced to go with gems for monetary reasons as part of the DeNA deal [i.e. game wouldn't have enough money to be made otherwise], then I can sympathise with that decision. It still sucks, but it's not as bad as him willingly deciding that gems are the right way to go. I'm not sure what kind of point you're trying to make... But you're talking about something completely different than I am. I never talked about the *nature* of the influence that DeNA had. Just that DeNA HAD influence on the situation. Peter defered to them for advice. Even if the himself made the final decisions, they very EXISTENCE in this endeavour means that they had some influence in the choices made along the way. Its completely irrelevant whether this choice is coerced or willing - 'influence' has nothing to do with 'willingness'. Fact - DeNA gave Peter advice on the whole mobile side of things and Peter has acknowledged that he deferred to them when it came to the mobile version of Godus.Fact - DeNA has a trackrecord of doing things with some very questionable methods of monetization. Fact - 22cans/Peter made obvious moves to focus on the mobile release after the SEA release was less than successful. While we can only speculate on the nature behind these decisions and while we do not know whether or not Peter had the intention to go heavy mobile focus right from the start. It is undeniable that DeNA's existence, and their subsequent contract with 22cans had DIRECT influence on some of the decisions made. What shape or form this influence took is something we can only speculate about - but that this influence existed is a simple fact. If you on your way to work walk past a bakery and you smell fresh bread - the smell of fresh bread will likely have a direct influence on your decision to go in and buy some. Were you coerced in this or was it a willing choice to walk in? Well I doubt the baker or the bread held you at gunpoint... But the fact still remains that if you had not smelled the bread or seen the bakery, you would not have entered it and bought the bread unless you were planning to do so from the start. The very presence of the smell of fresh bread had influence on your subsequent decision to buy said fresh bread. DeNA is the same, their very inclusion in this project means that they had SOME influence on the decisions being made. Even if that influence was limited to suggesting various options or methods. Its still influence they exerted over the project. Influence is not the same as coercion - if you were thinking that I implied DeNA FORCED Peter to make decisions, you severely misread the meaning of what I posted. |
|
|
|
Post by rubgish on Aug 27, 2014 22:06:38 GMT
You have to be joking if you think that there isn't a difference between being forced to do something and having someone convince you that it's the right thing to do. One is willing, one is not. It's literally the only choice that matters. If Peter has been forced to go with gems for monetary reasons as part of the DeNA deal [i.e. game wouldn't have enough money to be made otherwise], then I can sympathise with that decision. It still sucks, but it's not as bad as him willingly deciding that gems are the right way to go. I'm not sure what kind of point you're trying to make... But you're talking about something completely different than I am. I never talked about the *nature* of the influence that DeNA had. Just that DeNA HAD influence on the situation. Peter defered to them for advice. Even if the himself made the final decisions, they very EXISTENCE in this endeavour means that they had some influence in the choices made along the way. Its completely irrelevant whether this choice is coerced or willing - 'influence' has nothing to do with 'willingness'. Fact - DeNA gave Peter advice on the whole mobile side of things and Peter has acknowledged that he deferred to them when it came to the mobile version of Godus.Fact - DeNA has a trackrecord of doing things with some very questionable methods of monetization. Fact - 22cans/Peter made obvious moves to focus on the mobile release after the SEA release was less than successful. While we can only speculate on the nature behind these decisions and while we do not know whether or not Peter had the intention to go heavy mobile focus right from the start. It is undeniable that DeNA's existence, and their subsequent contract with 22cans had DIRECT influence on some of the decisions made. What shape or form this influence took is something we can only speculate about - but that this influence existed is a simple fact. If you on your way to work walk past a bakery and you smell fresh bread - the smell of fresh bread will likely have a direct influence on your decision to go in and buy some. Were you coerced in this or was it a willing choice to walk in? Well I doubt the baker or the bread held you at gunpoint... But the fact still remains that if you had not smelled the bread or seen the bakery, you would not have entered it and bought the bread unless you were planning to do so from the start. The very presence of the smell of fresh bread had influence on your subsequent decision to buy said fresh bread. DeNA is the same, their very inclusion in this project means that they had SOME influence on the decisions being made. Even if that influence was limited to suggesting various options or methods. Its still influence they exerted over the project. Influence is not the same as coercion - if you were thinking that I implied DeNA FORCED Peter to make decisions, you severely misread the meaning of what I posted. Ugh. Firstly, I don't care enough so i'm going to make this brief. 1) You list 1 fact, not 3. Points 2 & 3 are opinion. 2) If you willingly buy bread it is still your choice. The bakery or lack thereof is not important. Similarly, it doesn't matter if DeNA is involved or not if Peter is willing to go the current F2P route. My point is that willingly and forced to are not the same and shouldn't be treated the same. |
|
|
|
Post by Gmr Leon on Aug 27, 2014 22:37:02 GMT
Ugh. Firstly, I don't care enough so i'm going to make this brief. 1) You list 1 fact, not 3. Points 2 & 3 are opinion. 2) If you willingly buy bread it is still your choice. The bakery or lack thereof is not important. Similarly, it doesn't matter if DeNA is involved or not if Peter is willing to go the current F2P route. My point is that willingly and forced to are not the same and shouldn't be treated the same. ...You're really just talking past each other. Danjal agrees that 22cans may not have been forced into it by DeNA or anything, only that they probably guided some of the gem store pricing that Peter seems to have gone head over heels for of his own accord. That's the biggest point to take away from this, I think, DeNA probably didn't have to guide Peter to go with free to play, Curiosity's proof enough he was willing to go that route, but the overall pricing, frequency of micotransaction prompts, and when to introduce the microtransactions were probably discussed with DeNA thus influencing some aspects of the gem store design. What was decided would fit best in there was probably all left up to 22cans. In that regard, you're both right that 22cans was not forced down the path they took with the gem store and were probably very willing to go with that whole idea, but I think it's undeniable that DeNA did influence and affect some nuances of its implementation. |
|
|
|
Post by Danjal on Aug 27, 2014 23:09:43 GMT
Thats exactly what I was pointing out Gmr Leon - regardless of the nature of their influence, their influence in and of itself is quite obvious. (Also, regardless of my opinion of the monetization methods generally applied by DeNA - these very same methods are applied to Godus. Yes, I find these methods morally questionable at best, yet even if I did not have this opinion about them. The nature of the methods and the fact that these methods are seen in most if not all games DeNA has a hand in is fact, not opinion.) You will note that I never talked about DeNA forcing certain decisions. Only about *influencing* certain decisions. Because at the end of the day I do not have the PROOF to say which side of the fence the decisions falls to. Be it willing or unwilling, I can only observe which elements were part of the situation. And DeNA is definitely one of them. You are quite correct in noting that Curiosity already showed Peter's interest in the mobile market - which might well have lead to Peter's subsequent decision to go into a contract with DeNA for Godus and take advantage of their expertise and experience on the mobile platform. |
|
feanix
Suspected 22Cans staff
Posts: 73 
|
Post by feanix on Aug 28, 2014 9:34:29 GMT
I think Peter already has a reputation for following his own vision. For example, the dog in fable was apparently universally decried as a terrible idea by the rest of Lionhead. He ignored them and stuck with it. That's how he does things. It's the source of all the controversy. We could say "Peter, please don't promise any huge new features on the next press trip" but he won't listen, he'll do what he thinks is best. Any design decisions ultimately lie at Peter's feet, not DeNA's. Why would you work for someone like that. That's the most frustrating type of boss ever. Does he ever listen? Well, I'm a VFX artist. I'm really here to make VFX. I'm not here to have a who listens to my ideas. So from that stand point I'm fine with the situation. It's nice to get heard but it's not hugely important to me. |
|
|
|
Post by Deth on Aug 28, 2014 12:25:03 GMT
I can understand that. You like doing Art. He says "Draw me this" you do and get paid for what you draw. It sounds like you at least enjoy what you get to make? Are you at least allowed some freedom in what you create? or is he micromanage like in what he wants you to make for the game? I.E. Does he say This is where I want us to be, get there how you can. or is he more This is where I want us to be, and to get there I want this, this and this to be done along the way?
|
|
feanix
Suspected 22Cans staff
Posts: 73
|
Post by feanix on Aug 28, 2014 13:37:34 GMT
He's very hands off when it comes to my work. I think he's given me a direct request for something specific less than three times in over two years. Mostly I get a request for VFX to support or convey blah (it's very loose, sometimes its something like "VFX to draw attention to object" and that's it, no description of what they should look like or whatever) and then me and the other artists sit down, brain storm some awesome art to go with it and then we just get on with it. Peter's not really involved in that and it works out really well. Say what you like about Peter but he trusts his team to get the job done. It's a nice environment to work in.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deth on Aug 28, 2014 13:47:25 GMT
Cool. Glad to hear you are luck to work in a place like that. And again, I have nothing personal again Peter, but just like the lead designer years and years ago for the MMO Horizons, when he opens his mouth in public he puts his foot in it and the team behind him is left trying to figure to do what he promised or work around what he said would not happen but they knew needed to happen.
|
|
|
|
Post by Danjal on Aug 28, 2014 14:09:16 GMT
He's very hands off when it comes to my work. I think he's given me a direct request for something specific less than three times in over two years. Mostly I get a request for VFX to support or convey blah (it's very loose, sometimes its something like "VFX to draw attention to object" and that's it, no description of what they should look like or whatever) and then me and the other artists sit down, brain storm some awesome art to go with it and then we just get on with it. Peter's not really involved in that and it works out really well. Say what you like about Peter but he trusts his team to get the job done. It's a nice environment to work in. Yet he doesn't listen to hundreds, if not thousands of people crying out that there's something wrong with the game. He doesn't listen to dozens upon dozens of negative reviews. Maybe its just me, but I've got a feeling there's a massive disconnect going on somewhere here. Cause the information doesn't quite add up. |
|
feanix
Suspected 22Cans staff
Posts: 73
|
Post by feanix on Aug 28, 2014 14:46:26 GMT
I think Peter believes in his idea and he's trying to massage and tweak it to the point where everyone will say "Ooooh, NOW we see what you were doing! This all makes sense now!". He's done it a bunch of times before, I think, and he's sticking to what's worked in the past. I think he's spent a lot of his career making decisions despite what conventional wisdom dictated. Sometimes it's worked, sometimes not. *shrugs*
|
|
|
|
Post by nerdyvonnerdling on Aug 28, 2014 21:14:09 GMT
Safe to say with this particular project, it ain't working. Not that it doesn't make sense, mind you - it's all pretty sensible, just, it's not a very fun game. The concept that was pitched is still something that could be amazing, but somewhere along the way, it got turned into yet another totally typical FTP Farmvillian deal. In other news, along with not doing terribly well in the US, it is no longer doing all too well in the UKThe only relevant line - "Unfortunately for 22Cans, Godus has now dropped off the radar after a promising start to life on the charts." |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2014 21:17:37 GMT
Safe to say with this particular project, it ain't working. Not that it doesn't make sense, mind you - it's all pretty sensible, just, it's not a very fun game. The concept that was pitched is still something that could be amazing, but somewhere along the way, it got turned into yet another totally typical FTP Farmvillian deal. In other news, along with not doing terribly well in the US, it is no longer doing all too well in the UKThe only relevant line - "Unfortunately for 22Cans, Godus has now dropped off the radar after a promising start to life on the charts." You missed the "saddest" part "Unfortunately for 22Cans, Godus has now dropped off the radar after a promising start to life on the charts. Other losers include..." |
|
|
|
Post by hardly on Aug 28, 2014 21:55:34 GMT
I think Peter believes in his idea and he's trying to massage and tweak it to the point where everyone will say "Ooooh, NOW we see what you were doing! This all makes sense now!". He's done it a bunch of times before, I think, and he's sticking to what's worked in the past. I think he's spent a lot of his career making decisions despite what conventional wisdom dictated. Sometimes it's worked, sometimes not. *shrugs* There is nothing wrong with an ambitious designer throwing caution to the wind and trying to develop a game that breaks new ground. Our beef with GODUS is that its not breaking any new ground. The game comes off as someone turning up late to a party and desperately trying to fit in (unsuccessfully) with the cool crowd.
One person cant have all the ideas. If Peter had crowd sourced ideas from the PC community, tested them with us on forums and then got us to test them in game it would have been a better product. Nobody would have cared if he put a feature in and had to do a reversal if it was part of a shared process. The problem from our point of view is that the mobile version polluted the PC version (timers, waiting, frustration, simple interface, etc) and so we cant fix the game because that would involve changing core mobile features. So many features are scared cows that nobody but Peter likes. This leaves Peter isolated, alone and working like a dictator.
Ultimately when people say you are doing it wrong for a year and then your big day comes and its a flop maybe its time to consider they knew what they were talking about. The masses aren't always right but when 94% of people say you've done it wrong you probably have.
I don't want 22Cans/GODUS to go tits up but dammit if you keep going blindly forward you will go off the cliff.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2014 22:02:24 GMT
I think Peter believes in his idea and he's trying to massage and tweak it to the point where everyone will say "Ooooh, NOW we see what you were doing! This all makes sense now!". He's done it a bunch of times before, I think, and he's sticking to what's worked in the past. I think he's spent a lot of his career making decisions despite what conventional wisdom dictated. Sometimes it's worked, sometimes not. *shrugs* There is nothing wrong with an ambitious designer throwing caution to the wind and trying to develop a game that breaks new ground. Our beef with GODUS is that its not breaking any new ground. The game comes off as someone turning up late to a party and desperately trying to fit in (unsuccessfully) with the cool crowd. Well put. With all the frantic waving around of his "invest-to-play" terminology, I'd say this is exactly how he came off. I think his recent pocketgamer.biz interview is pretty solid evidence he was trying to re-invent the wheel as something sparkly and new, only to come up with a batch of normal, run-of-the-mill F2P wheels instead.  “Designers in this industry have to own free-to-play and have to love free-to-play and have to define free-to-play and not run away from free-to-play.” - Peter Molyneux If that's how you really feel about it Mr. Molyneux, I can without an ounce of hesitation say you'll never (knowingly) see another pence from me again. |
|
|
|
Post by hardly on Aug 28, 2014 22:19:51 GMT
There is nothing wrong with an ambitious designer throwing caution to the wind and trying to develop a game that breaks new ground. Our beef with GODUS is that its not breaking any new ground. The game comes off as someone turning up late to a party and desperately trying to fit in (unsuccessfully) with the cool crowd. Well put. With all the frantic waving around of his "invest-to-play" terminology, I'd say this is exactly how he came off. I think his recent pocketgamer.biz interview is pretty solid evidence he was trying to re-invent the wheel as something sparkly and new, only to come up with a batch of normal, run-of-the-mill F2P wheels instead. “Designers in this industry have to own free-to-play and have to love free-to-play and have to define free-to-play and not run away from free-to-play.” - Peter Molyneux If that's how you really feel about it Mr. Molyneux, I can without an ounce of hesitation say you'll never (knowingly) see another pence from me again.
I do agree with Peter in one regard and that is that F2P isn't inherently bad. Its the mechanics that often drive monetisation that are bad. Peter was right to aim for F2P without frustration, he just gave in at some point and realised that frustration was easier than the alternatives.
With DOTA2 they developed a compelling game loved by millions of people. Then they layered on cosmetic monetisation on top. I've spent $150 if I've spent a $1 on DOTA2 and I regret none of it. Peter could have made GODUS a compelling game and layered cosmetic monetisation over the top of it. That option was obviously too hard for him so he adopted the very same mechanics he criticised others for adopting.
|
|
