Tafdolphin wrote:rudderless wrote:Trelliz wrote:rudderless wrote:Regardless of whether or not the idea of a product underdelivering on promises could apply to many of the games Molyneux's been involved with, he's not wrong. And those games didn't cost £130.
In that case i withdraw my previous statement, he's the best person to spot an overhyped shit-train.
Ha ha, no, it's a perfectly reasonable observation, I just think in this instance he's absolutely right (and if Kinect had done as MS originally promised, who knows? Maybe Milo would have been the game-changer it was mooted as).
Wasn't there a tell-all a while back stating the entire Milo demo was 100% scripted? There was no AI code at all, it was a CG video running on a screen with an actress acting against it.
It was half true. Smoke and mirrors demo. It was an amalgamation of tech demos and R&D projects lionhead had worked on over 10 years. I read the story behind milo only the other week when Molyneux resurfaced, the link was in the gaf topic. It was quite an interesting read looking at the concepts and prototypes that it was built upon
As for Kinect, he is right. The unit was going to be much more advanced originally (when Milo was announced) and could notice facial features and a wider view etc as he mentions but the unit was rumoured (at the time) to be hella expensive (probably why Nintendo and Sony passed on incorporating it in their consoles) and so Microsoft downspecced it to bring it to the £100ish mark. Stripping the CPU etc out of it meant it could never deliver on its original concepts)
