|
Rainbow-PCM sat down with Alpha Centauri Designer Brian Reynolds of Firaxis Games
for this exclusive interview.
R-PCM: What did you feel was the most difficult challenge in producing the game?
Reynolds: Up until now, all of the games Sid (Meier) and I have done have been "history" games; we'd never
done a science fiction or fantasy game. With Alpha Centauri, we decided to do a futuristic game, but apply our strength in history to make a kind of realistic
"future history" rather than just a space opera. The biggest challenge was creating a future world which players could relate to--whereas with history games most players come pre-wired
with their "Schoolhouse Rock" notions of how history went, the future is all new and must be introduced carefully.
R-PCM: What do you feel is the greatest innovation in the game?
Reynolds: Hmmm, it's hard to pick a specific one since we were trying to
improve things all across the board. Some of my favorites are (a) a "terraformable" world which can change as the game progresses (b) social engineering to allow players to enact
their own visions of future utopia, and (c) multiplayer--full net support is not often seen in complex turn-based games like Alpha Centauri, especially in the original version.
R-PCM: Given that you worked with Sid Meier and that many will compare
Alpha Centauri with Civilization II, aside from the obvious eye candy-type advances in the game, how do you think Alpha Centauri improves the genre of the "world conquest" type game?
Reynolds: Well, all of the things mentioned above, plus some of the
strongest AI we've done to date. The individual differences between factions, and the bonuses and penalties which they lead to, also add a lot of flavor to the play.
R-PCM: If you had it to do all over again, what would you change?
Reynolds: If I was writing Alpha Centauri knowing all that I know now,
I'd have realized sooner just how cool the individualized factions and backstory are, and spent even more time making those stand out.
R-PCM: Your comments on turn-based games would be very appreciated: do
you believe turn-based games are more strategic, can pack more "thought" into the code and/or have a more sophisticated future than real-time games. As the designer of several of
these type of games, what do you think the future of turn-based games is?
Reynolds: I think turn-based games have a long and glorious future ahead of them.
Real-time games have been the fad lately, and what they have going for them is the time-pressure they entail--time pressure can be exciting. But when you're pressed for time, you
can only keep track of so many things going on at once--sooner or later, you are forced to forget about some of your pieces, and you miss out on a lot of what's going on. In a turn based game,
you have time to keep complete control over all of your pieces, and a lot of players really like that. We think real-time games are cool--after all, our first game, Sid Meier's Gettysburg, was
real-time, but we see a strong market for turn-based games as well, and we will continue to produce them as long as our fans continue to demand them--and that demand shows no signs of abating.
|