Here goes the logic:
Peter M. creates a new Fable II and adds in a companion dog
Fans rejoice!
Peter M. gets feedback from gamer that he finds hurting his virtual dog funny
Peter finds this fantastic
“The other bloke standing next to him said, ‘Ah, you’re such a wimp. I just left my dog and he was hurt and he had to crawl around and I found it funny. It just made me laughed he was so injured all of the time.’”
“That was a fantastic moment for me because I realized that’s what I wanted. Some people are going to be fanatical about the dog, but I didn’t want to ram him down your throat. I didn’t want to insist that you had him.”
Why did Peter Molyneux bother putting the dog into the game if he doesn’t want it to be a pivotal part of the game? The only reason I and many other gamers want to pick up Fable II is because of the ability to use the dog to battle and find loot. To me the dog is what sets this apart from the first iteration of Fable on the Xbox, I guess I fall into the category of those people that will be fanatical about it.
I semi understand what he means about people possibly being forced to play with the companion dog, but then why not just make an option where you can just send the dog away, instead of being cruel to the virtual animal and not feeding or caring for it. Many of you probably play World of Warcraft and know that the Hunter class has the ability to have a pet follow you around the world as well. The difference is that Blizzard’s view and design of the pet makes it pivotal to the gameplay and if you choose to not want your pet with you, than you can then simply Dismiss the animal. Blizzard does not find a need to leave your pet dying in the woods in order to get rid of it and the pet in WoW is much more simplistic.
For me the companion pet is a lot of fun as it is for many other gamers, having it fight, do tricks or find treasure is going to be a great experience and if I did not want to play with the dog then I would just grab a different game. Play Ninja Gaiden if you just want to hack and slash through levels, my thought was to play Fable II in order to see how you could integrate your dog into gameplay, perhaps I was wrong?
I find Peter Molyneux’s logic of thinking that this deranged gamer finding his dog hurt funny, utterly ridiculous. A person who thinks that torturing a virtual pet is fantastic probably has some sort of issues.
What do you think?
I think the dog system is wonderful. PM keeps pushing that fable II is all about how the game makes you feel. If you had the ability to just turn the dog off, then there would be no consequence for doing so. If you want to ditch the dog, then you are forced do deal with the situation and (maybe) the guilt that it will cause (the dog will eventually catch up to you and this will affect the townspeaple’s views about you). It turns the dog into a living breathing creature rather than just a mechanic to help you get through the game.
I don’t understand this:
“The difference is that Blizzard’s view and design of the pet makes it pivotal to the gameplay and if you choose to not want your pet with you, than you can then simply Dismiss the animal”
If you have the choice to not use the pet, then it is not pivital to the game play.
I guess you can look at it this way: If you were walking down the street and a dog started following you around, there is no off button. You can either allow the dog to be you companion, or you can completely ignore the situation, either way you are forced to make a choice and that choice is going to have consequences. Its all part of making a living, breathing world that is shaped by your desicions. I absolutely love it.
My wife keeps asking me what kind of dog that is pictured in the post? Do you know?