Yep, VERY OLD. Video dates from october 2009..

Yeah, he's a schmuck and all of his games are, at heart, reworkings of the tedium that was Populous. Every know and then people make great claims for the realism, or open endedness of their games, but the only games which are like this are multiplayer games, where other humans genuinely act differently/unpredictably - either that or they're just better than you so it's up to the engine to find servers where people are about as good as you (as quakelive, for instance, does).

...the video is very old and faked.

watch the way that milo looks directly at the girl around the 40 second point. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8aUhsrM0sA [youtube.com] explains things.

Peter Molyneux has ceased to be taken seriously by most people when it comes to his rather crappy games - perhaps he has realized he has nothing to lose and has decided its time to engage in outright deception.

Peter Molyneux is known for empty promises because he makes features up as he talks about them. When he tells you about this great new feature in the game chance is that's the first time the development team hears of it.

I didn't get far enough into B&W to really see anything interesting. I just remember struggling with the "innovative" and "intuitive" control system and thinking it was actually just "fiddly" and "incredibly frustrating". I remember trying to get a peon to go up a mountain to do... something or other at the beginning of the game, and failing for some arbitrary reason and being forced to do the whole thing again right from the beginning. As usual, big promises with some serious flaws in implementation. I honestly think the guy has some good ideas if he could just reign in the ambition and deliver a solid gaming experience instead of reaching too far and not spending enough time on the fundamentals. I played most of the way through Fable, it was a pretty average game really, a lot of ideas were crammed in there but just didn't go anywhere. The ageing of the character, for instance, didn't seem to have any real impact, and the fact that it was tied to major story points just made it feel unrealistic.

As for games which try and let you play as good or evil, and alter the story on that basis, they always fall into the trap of forcing you down a particular path. Having just played Mass Effect 2 and Red Dead Redemption, they both have exactly the same fundamentally flawed mission type, namely: fight through fifty guys (who are probably just employees of the main bad guy defending themselves from this lone lunatic storming their base) and happily kill them all with no ill effects, but then be pushed down the path of "evil" if you mete out the same justice to the main bad guy instead of sending him to trial, even though in other instances its fine to summarily execute people who you could just as easily take into custody.