Absolute Games Interview

What is your occupation right now?

Retired. Actually, re-retired. I took a year off after leaving Sierra, then worked as VP of Technology for a local dot.com for most of 2000. But even though I hired a great team and they created a great product, the company ran out of money before it could sell it. So, I guess that officially makes me another dot.com statistic!

From your point of view, what is the main thing in game design?

Since game design, like film directing, is made up of dozens of smaller parts, “balance” is the most important, because any game that too strongly emphasizes one area over another will feel “wrong” and thus, not be fun to play. I think we’ve all played games where we’ve said, "Well, the ______ was great, but the ______ really sucked." That’s lack of balance.

What is it like to be one of the oldest game designers on the planet? How do you feel?

Ancient. Pre-Andeluvian. Seriously, I think my age brought uniqueness to my games that a younger person wouldn’t have. And anything that keeps you from being “just another game” is good.

Did you have any proposals from any other game companies after you left Sierra?

Of course, but nothing that interested me. You see, I was very fortunate in my relationship with Sierra while Ken Williams was in charge. He and I saw eye-to-eye on everything, and when we didn’t, I was wrong, of course! He believed in finding creative voices and letting us do the kind of game we wanted to do. And then, he’d go sell them. It was a great idea. I wonder why more publishers don’t work that way!

Do you want to return to the game industry? If yes, what post do you want to hold?

I would only be willing to return under certain conditions: like somebody would pay me every once in awhile, allow me to make the kind of games that I can do well (puzzles, sophomoric humor and a little risqué but not obscene), and then sell them so I could go make more. I think that post is commonly called “game designer,” although since my track record was 25 games out of 27 on-time and on-budget, I would also make a good VP of Development.

Sierra published lots of adventure games and these games had enough popularity in order to be sold. Then why did Sierra suddenly stop all its adventure projects?

Sierra got bought out by a large conglomerate, which then merged with another large conglomerate, which then realized that nobody there knew shit about games, and then sold off all its game companies to a French conglomerate (for 25 cents on the dollar!), which then merged with Seagram’s/Universal Studios. Whew! And people wonder, "Has Sierra changed?"

Have you ever had an idea to buy back Larry’s license from Sierra and continue LSL8 development yourself?

I’ve considered it, but my strength lies in the creative process, not in manufacturing, marketing, and selling. That’s why the author/publisher arrangement has survived all these years. The two parts of the business really have little in common. Besides, if no major American publisher thinks adventure games can make a profit, what makes me think that I could?

Theoretically LSL-games are games for adults, but lots of kids and teenagers played these games. What do you think about it? Or maybe you specially put in the Larry games something that can teach kids to live (like using the condom in LSL1)?

I believe it’s a parent’s responsibility to supervise what his children see. I hate censorship. I’m an adult. I should be able to rent or buy whatever I want. That said, I never let my own kids see my games until I felt they were old enough to understand what was going on. I think my games reflect that. Remember: Sierra always promised more naughtiness on the package than I ever put in the games.

You are the one who worked in game industry since its birth and you’ve seen a few “generations” of games.

Everything runs in cycles and games are no exception. Ten years ago, you couldn’t give away RPGs. Now, they’re hot. Action games were <10% of the market in the late 80s. Now, they’re the leader. I hold out hope that adventure games will make a comeback someday too.

What do you think about the future of computer games?

I think games will continue to push the envelope of PCs and encourage more and better hardware as they always have. I look forward to the day when you won’t be able to sell your old X-box at a garage sale because machines that are many times more powerful sell for $300 at Wal-Mart.

Is it possible to call computer games "art?"

Yes. But not many of them!

What are the differences between art and design? Or these words are equal?

No, they’re not equal to me. In the small sense, art is what you see on the screen: the graphics. But in the larger sense, it takes a great design, tight coding, good graphics and sound, balanced game play, attention to details, proper pacing, and many more things to make a game that I would call "Art."

What advice do you have for modern game developers?

If you truly believe in your work, take the smallest advances and largest royalties you can possibly negotiate. You’ll work harder and, if you’re good, you’ll reap more of the rewards.

Don’t be afraid of expressing your personality through your games. That’s what will make your game different from the run-of-the-mill grist that most publishers grind out.

And get your name on the front of the box and your photo on the back. That way, when you’re an old has-been like me, people will still drop by your web site (www.allowe.com) and tell you how your work affected their lives. It’s a great feeling to hear from so many wonderful fans. Hell, we thought we were just making the kind of games we wanted to play. We knew they seemed to sell pretty well, but seriously, I had no idea how many lives I was affecting!