Develop

I think the key minds behind some games should be celebrated more - although only if they want to. You mention the GTA team - but the Rockstars, although by name rockstars, have chosen to let the games speak for themselves.

Molyneux is the complete opposite - he's a showman, and he knows it.

So it comes down to choice. I bet Valve could have milked Kim Swift's profile when popularity of Portal swelled late last year, but Swift may well have wanted avoid that.

Hmm. I'm not sure, jamba. Trying to get lots of attention and coverage for a designer or producer who also has an actual job to do is difficult. Celebrities exist because being a celebrity is part of their job - actors work and then have time off to galavant around. Same for the more comparable fields like directors, artists, architects, writers - they work on a project then have plenty of spare time around it. Developers don't have that luxury so much - the job is much more of a rolling, consistent thing.

I am in total agreement with Peter. If you look back to the mid 90s there was a conscious effort by the big media companies Sony, EA, etc. to kill the names of small developers or known individuals. Prior to this companies like Virgin, Renegade and Mirrorsoft were actually trading on the back of the developers famous names.
I guess it is just a fashion thing, but ultimately it is to do with control and perceived ownership.
However the experience of Eidos with Championship Manager and Tomb Raider proves that emotionally the IP will always belong to the developer who originated it, regardless of it's legal ownership.

The truth is creative direction of games is a complex business these days and a good creative director will listen to everyone involved in the design, art, and programing of the game and mostly be responsible for the big decisions and holding the casting vote over the direction of the game. Game Design is a team effort, with leadership. It would be nice if both the team and the Key individuals got the credit they deserved in the same way that we have at least 7 specific individual BAFTA awards for acting, directing, script writing etc, these appear conspicuously absent in our awards which focus much more on the products (and therefore the publishing company) rather than the people that make them.

If Peter Molyneux is there where he is, it is because he has earned it by developing games. So why not enjoy the fame that comes from making great artistic forms?

"So do developers really need their day in the sun to succeed?"

Most of us developers don't even know what the sun looks like given all that time spent inside on crunch during the summer, ho ho ho!

On a pure marketing level, I think it's appropriate for a publisher to utilize the "rock-star" factor. If a game has Will Wright, Sid Meier, or Peter Molyneux's name attached to it, I'm going to consider buying it because these are people in our industry who have done wonderful work in the past and that will affect my purchasing decision.

As far as publishers fearing a famous person leaving and taking a project with them, it's in the best interest of a publisher to make the rock-star feel supported and content to continue the relationship. I think if a developer is feeling they have the ability to execute their vision in the best way they can and get the game to market, they'll stay with that publisher. And if the publisher can sell more games because of the superstar at the helm then I believe that's a great combination.