How set in stone is that plan, and how far into the future are you looking in terms of overall WoW development?

Frank Pearce: Well, the goal is concrete. That's our goal, and we've publicly stated that. Whether or not we'll be able to achieve that goal remains to be seen. An expansion set of the scope of The Burning Crusade is a lot of content to deliver on, on an annual basis. We're working to improve our production methods, to try and be more efficient on delivering and creating quality content. But at the end of the day, the quality of the experience is more important than the timeline it's delivered in. It's our goal to do it in that timeline but, if it's not ready, then... [sounds, on our dictaphone, like someone was eating a big bag of crisps at this point so we couldn't quite hear what was said. No one was actually eating a big bag of crisps, but that's what it sounds like].

And as far as how long we'd do that, that depends on the community, right? Because if players are playing WoW, we certainly want to continue to support it.

You talked a bit about physics there - obviously '2003 was one of the first games to incorporate rag doll physics, how are physics affecting gameplay in 2007?

Mark Rein: Nicely, nicely. We've started to use physics for a lot more of the effects than we have in the past, like if you noticed in Onslaught the power core has pieces falling off it. It just makes in more immersive and more believable that these pieces are flying properly and colliding with each other, things like that. We have some physics-based particle effects, the Dark Walker uses physics to navigate, the vehicles now have lots of articulations and suspension. The characters if you look really carefully - we don't just do rag doll anymore, we actually mix; we blend animation, rag doll and physics together to produce some really, really cool animation effects.

The maps are looking gorgeous as well. Will any familiar locales be coming back?

Mark Rein: Yeah, I don't know which ones for sure; I'm not really up on what classic maps we're bringing back, but the maps are just beautiful. One thing we did learn with UT2004 was to build the map as a shell first, make sure that we get all the playability correct, make sure that it's really a fun map to play before we start decorating it. In the past you would do those things together but you weren't dealing with such a high degree of decoration, static meshes and things going on in the maps that it was a big deal if you had to bust a hole in the wall. But now that's a big deal; it's so much easier to wire up a house when it's in its frame than it is once the dry-wall's in. We definitely learned a lot about how to make better gameplay by better level design.

FiringSquad: The multiplayer features in the game sound pretty interesting. What can you tell us about the dev team's plans for multiplayer in the game?

Waubert de Genlis: The game will provide deathmatch, team deathmatch and the brand-new Crusade mode, all of which support up to 32 players on the same map. The team at Kuju in the UK has been solely dedicated to that part of the game.

In the multiplayer part of the game you will play character 'classes', similar to what can be found in games like Battlefield 1942. The classes will have the opportunity to evolve during online campaigns. The Crusade mode will be more of mix between Battlefield and WoW Battlegrounds. The rounds will take place on huge maps where you have 'reinforcements' (or spawn point). You have to capture flags on the map to make the opposite side's reinforcements decrease, and the game ends when there are no spawn points left or when all flags on the map have been captured.

On top of that, players will be rewarded with skill points for each 'Act of Bravery' they perform. An act of bravery could be to kill and enemy, of course, but also capturing a spawn point, healing a teammate or assisting with decisive help in a battle (like blinding an enemy to allow a warrior to kill him for instance). The skills you earn allow you to purchase new skills or to strengthen existing ones. The skills will be class-dependant.

Aeropause: How old are you and where are you from?

Schmuck5000: I am 24 years old and I live in central Texas.

Aeropause: Besides Halo 2 are there any other games at which you cheat?

Schmuck5000: I play BF2 and some Counter Strike. I cheat at both but it’s hard to get away with in Counter Strike. People who play CS are such babies about that stuff. The other players are just jealous p***ys who wish they had the ability to cheat.

Aeropause: How many times have you been banned or suspended from gaming servers?

Schmuck5000: Wow, I have been kicked of XBL at least 10 times, I have to be careful now because there are no more 2 month cards floating around. The people at Bungie are the worst. How can they complain about people like me. They should have built a anti-cheating engine in the game to prevent it. Its not my fault that modders cheat.

GS: Give us an overview of the game's six character professions.

SH: The classes are gladiator, mystic, priest, rogue, scout, and soldier. To give some detail, the gladiator is the real hands-on kind of guy. He wants to get out there and kill everything in style, while the soldier is very defensive and focused on outlasting his opponent. Likewise, the scout is your ranged single-target damage dealer, whereas the rogue is like the gladiator's stealthy little brother--get in close and make things bleed. Finally, the priest is your healer and has the ability to curse, while the mystic has the power to just lay down incredible amounts of ranged area damage on targets.

To further augment the classes, they will each have additional feats that allow them to become more specialized in their class. So the gladiator can choose from ropes or fighting gloves to make him more ruthless. The soldier gets shields and two-handed weapons. The rogue gets distance fighting and close fighting. The scout gets infiltration and beast handling. The mystic gets summoning and necromancy. And finally, the priest gets blessing and cursing.

IGN: In the game - you feel elated to be winning but it's lined with considerable guilt as the population death count runs into the millions. Was this meant to be a deliberate moral conflict for the player, or do you feel that we're distanced enough from the Cold War to see this as ironic/humorous?

Chris Delay: It's been interesting - we've had a fair number of questions along this vein about the potential ethical dilemmas that a game like DEFCON presents. The games industry is a safe target for the newly-elected politician with a social agenda - it's easy to find a correlation between increased crime rates and violent computer games. The fact that developers are being made to feel culpable is evident; only last week we had a interview sent over asking our thoughts on the rise of extreme violence in videogames and how it's used almost as a default method nowadays. On the other hand when we first tried to rate DEFCON with PEGI there was no option for implied violence, so DEFCON, a game where you can instigate and observe with complete detachment the murder of millions, would have been issued with a 3+! The oversight in the rating system was quickly rectified but I think it merely serves to highlight the complexity of the issue and the current confusion surrounding it.

Certainly part of the power of DEFCON, and the discomfort you can feel playing it, is its cold, calculated, understated reporting of the horrors behind global warfare. You launch a nuke, it decimates your opponent's city and all you see is a small pop-up indicating the number of dead in one full sweep. You are entirely removed from the horrific reality of the situation - you simply press a button and the deed is done but you are not there to witness, and in this respect, take responsibility for the heinousness of your actions.

Nuclear war is such an abstract concept, that it's actually better suited to being abstracted in a game. It requires a focus on game play and a presentation that players can become immersed in, without trying to distract them with flashy graphics.

Shack: Many feel the gaming industry is stagnating. Concepts being regurgitated endlessly, sequels being churned out at Tomb Raider-esque speeds, et cetera. What are your thoughts on the current state of the industry? Do you see things as picking up, or is some real innovation needed?

CliffyB: I think things are stagnating a bit because it's hard enough to do what's been done before and even do it right. Games that make you play for an extended period of time without auto-checkpointing. Unintuitive controls. Horrible dialogue and voice acting. Crappy cameras. The list goes on. Making a videogame is such a difficult process that quite frankly I'm surprised any ever actually get done and that some of them are fun.

Now, I'm not saying Gears is going to be a perfect game - how much people like it remains to be seen. What I do know is that we as an industry have to perfect what we've got before we continue to try to completely reinvent it.

FiringSquad: What other gameplay elements do you consider to be important?

Jennifer Oneal: One feature we're all excited about is called "Nail TheTrick." It's an innovative new way to pull off tricks. Players use the analog sticks to control the skater's feet on the board. It's almost like trading in your automatic transmission for a manual transmission. You'll have total control of the tricks you perform and might be able to invent some new ones we've never seen before.

FiringSquad: This will be the first Tony Hawk game made that will truly take advantage of next-gen console hardware. How will Project 8 use the hardware of the PS3 and Xbox 360?

Jennifer Oneal: Both consoles will allow us to take the graphics and the gameplay further than we've been able to go before. We've completely scrapped our physics engine and rebuilt it from the ground up. You'll feel a real sense of momentum and gravity. Also, we've incorporated new physics for bails as well. The physics incorporated in the ragdoll bail mode allow you to control where and how badly you bail.

Graphically we have major enhancements. You'll see that using our advanced shading and lighting system along with specular and normal maps make for the most realistic environment you've ever seen in a Tony Hawk game. Water looks like water with all the ripples and reflection you would expect when you skate through a shallow pond. Glass has the translucency of glass. The detail of every surface is amazing.

This year for the athletes, we performed complete face and body scans, and motion captured all of their tricks. When you see Mike Vallely bust out his signature Mike V Shuffle, it's actually him doing it. Skateboarders will be able to recognize their favorite pro's skating style.

Speaking of online play, Tony Hawk's Project 8 is built with full online capabilities for Xbox 360, including support of Live, classic two-player challenges, a new game called Walls (which plays like Snake or Tron), and up to eight-player online games. But Project 8 is not online for PlayStation 3. Not online for PS3. Only within the last three weeks has Neversoft received its PS3 beta kits, a black horizontal box about one foot wide by two feet long and two inches deep, with a slew of buttons and dials on its front deck. Neversoft is confident the PS3 version of the game will ship at launch in November, but it still hasn't received all of the software libraries and has no indication of how the online components will work on PS3, so it's not offering them. For a software company that's always supported the PlayStation system and was, in fact, the first developer to offer online play on PS2 with Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 3, that's saying something. Neversoft wouldn't explain any further, but it's clear to this reporter that if Neversoft could go online with the PS3 version, it would.

FiringSquad:What can you tell us about Stargate World's combat?

Chris Bernert: We are pretty excited about our combat system from our preliminary prototypes. Let's just say that our combat system is more visceral than what most players are used to in the current crop of MMOs. Our system encourages the players to use cover while in combat and it's very advantageous also to keep moving. Weapon use is tactical so it's not just the standard option of "Well this sword has the best DPS so that's what I better use" systems that you see in most MMOs today. Also, our enemies are sneaky and don't play fair. Well, they do but it just feels like they are cheating because instead of standing in one spot and taking a beating, they practice self preservation.

AG: Who came up with the idea of having JA3D in real-time with "smart pause"? Also, there were rumblings about using phase-based combat [like in ALFA or Combat Mission]. Was it actually on the board, given the fact that early incarnations of JA3D used a modified version of ALFA: Antiterror's engine?

Vitaly Shutov: We had no plans to have phase-based battles in JA3D. The uncertainty with gameplay modes began when SFI filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. During that time, the game switched several coordinators at Strategy First. Sometimes a person would write us a letter and then leave for another company shortly thereafter. We felt the project was almost on hold, because the news we were receiving contradicted each other. It was hard to tell what game we were making and for whom.

Richard Therrien: I can't say who actually came up with the idea. All I can say is that I made it clear from the beginning that it was out of question. Initially, the game was supposed to be built over a modified Cops engine, at least which is what I was told. The choice to move over to a modified ALFA engine was even a surprise to me at the time and I do not believe I was all that comfortable with the idea. They were the ones who knew about their technology so I let them decide on this. In any case, the only base I imagined that could be useful for a conversion to Jagged Alliance 3D would have rested in the rendering engine, not the logic, not the interface nor any other related game structure.

AG (to Vitaly Shutov): As far as we know, it was presumed that Jagged Alliance 3D would become the remake of JA2: Unfinished Business while JA3 would be *the* sequel. When did JA3D and JA3 switch places?

Vitaly Shutov: I didn't quite get your "switched places" bit - no one switched. It's just that JA3D was a different beast than JA3, and we were working on realizing it step by step, until we were flooded with an endless stream of requests which effectively overridden the original idea.

FiringSquad: What other unique game play elements will be important in Theatre of War?

David Philippov: Unique damage system. Type, caliber and speed of a projectile, hit angle, armor thickness - everything makes difference. Then secondary damage, caused by shock wave and fragments spreading within the vehicle, is calculated taking into account the location of the crew members. Unit models are dynamically modified to accurately represent damage, so looking at a hole in the side of a tank you will be able to tell not only the exact hit location, but also a type and caliber of the projectile.

Also you are able to carry your troops over from mission to mission, thus preserving and continuously increasing their skill level.

An important element of the game is a morale system - soldiers react to danger, hide, run away. Their morale is influenced by proximity of the commander, tanks, and their comrades. Troops may panic and run for their lives despite any orders.

In short, one can also mention the following game play elements: troop deployment at the beginning of a mission, capturing enemy equipment, Army Composition mode allowing you to form the forces at your choice, as well as promotions and granting awards to the personnel.

FiringSquad: What other new features will be found in the expansion?

Chris Rubyor: The biggest feature we've added by far is the Corruption mechanic, particularly at the Galactic level. When the Underworld spreads Corruption to other planets, they get significant benefits such as unchallenged travel, so they don’t have to stop and flight at every enemy planet, as well as the ability to negatively impact enemy production times and costs.

One of my personal favorites is our new auto-ability feature. Players simply right-click on a special power button and the game will set the ability to automatically fire during a combat situation.

We've also added in a new Advanced Base Layout screen (found in galactic mode) that allows the player to move their structures and units to various positions on the maps. This was added at the request of fans who wanted more customization power for their base layouts.

We also took a hard look at our multiplayer component and made some huge tweaks. In Forces of Corruption, players will be able to have three-way battles as well as play mirrored matches against other players.

FiringSquad: What other interesting gameplay elements will Sins of a Solar Empire have?

Blair Fraser: One of the most interesting elements is the epic scale and seamless environment. There is a lot of confusion coming from players who are used to certain conventions in various game genres. From the 4X crowd we often get questions about the 'star map' and 'battle-mode' and from real-time strategy fans we often get questions about 'maps' and 'sensor mode'. Sins does not have a separate star map, battle mode, specific maps or sensor mode. They are all one in the same and which 'mode' you are in really depends on where you have your camera. If you are zoomed into a massive battle watching a fighter you are just enjoying the cinematics. If you zoom out a bit more you are controlling a single fleet in combat around a single planet. If you zoom out a bit more you are analyzing the tactical layout of everything in orbit around that planet. If you zoom out way past the planet you are viewing the strategic positioning of your fleets, planets, and trade routes in that one solar system. If you zoom out way past that you are examining the strategic layout of multiple solar systems within the galaxy. At any point you can zoom back down to watch and control one of potentially many simultaneous battles for a key planet. After describing this there are usually two questions. First, "How big is it all?" and second, "How can I control it all?" The answer to the first is straightforward: "Really big". The distances and relative sizes of things are pretty crazy. These numbers should give you an idea:

- Fighters are roughly 10m.
- Frigates average 120m in length.
- Capital ships fall between 500-750m.
- Planets have diameters of 15,000m.
- Stars have diameters of 50,000m.
- The distance from the atmosphere to the far orbit is on the order of 100,000m.
- A single solar system is on the order of 10,000,000 m from end to end.
- The distance between the 2 closest solar systems is around 250,000,000m.

Big numbers certainly don't guarantee great gameplay, but they do introduce some unique mechanics, strategies and help with immersion. You really get a sense of both space and empire! The answer to the second question regarding controlling so much is much more complicated. User interface plays a large role as does a lot of user choice on AI behaviors. Most actions the player can take can be selectively automated to some extent. Simply right click the button that would perform the action and it occurs automatically (e.g. auto-attacking, building, upgrading). A new concept we call the "Empire Tree" helps manage your entire empire no matter where you have placed your camera. Battles, building, movement and more can all be controlled here. It is basically a collapsible/expandable hierarchy of everything in your empire. The most important answer to the control question is "you can't control it all". Sins is about finding the optimal balance between playing the strategic overlord and playing the tactical battle commander. Which battle is the most important for me to manage personally? Of course in single player you can always pause the game and in multiplayer you can set up a short and more manageable deathmatch by adjusting the starting conditions for the game.

Gamezone: War Front defies RTS logic by fictionalizing a realistic-looking war by using new kinds of weaponry (example: the ice tank!). This idea is awesome. Can you tell us about the unit creation process, and how the team decided to go in this direction?

LB: Thanks for the compliment. As I see most of the people in the gamer community [are] fed up with "traditional" WW2 games. So we decided to spice up the things with some sci-fi unit development. The unit creation itself is much more mathematical than idealistic. At first we plan a function in the game, and later we try to find visual and audio implementation. For example we thought there should be units with an ability to immobilize enemy vehicles, after it we've found out some Ice effect would fit nicely to this functionality, and so on. As you supposedly know, there are tons of "numbers" and datasheets behind a well-balanced RTS game. In the case of War Front: Turning Point, we strictly went for the perfect gaming experience, and we fashioned every single bit of the game serving this single cause.

Gamezone: For nearly two decades RTS games have stayed on the PC, with various console ports here and there. Do you think that will change with the increase in console power (Xbox 360, PS3) and new, unique console controls (Wii's motion-sensitive controller)? Do you think the day will ever come when equally impressive strategy games will be made for a game console, if not specifically for a game console?

LB: My personal opinion is [that] there will be successful RTS ports for consoles as soon as someone can solve the problem of creating dragboxes without a mouse. Or when someone finds out a better way to command the micromanagement of big masses and single units at the same speed with one controller. We at the Digital Reality made some experiment with different console controllers in the past half year, and we are about to plan a console-based RTS game in the near future.

FiringSquad: What will the locations and missions in Patriot be like?

Mike Adams: There are 9 levels set in familiar urban settings such as residential neighborhoods, sewers, condominiums, shopping malls and many more. Each level will be mission based, from truck escort missions, de-fusing bombs, to hostage rescues.

FiringSquad: What kinds of weapons and items will be used in the game?

Mike Adams: There is quite the variety of weapons within the game. We have M9 pistols, AK47's, M60's, Grenades, Hammers, MP25's which shoot 25 rounds per second - among others. You will also need to keep your strength up by finding MRE's (Meal Ready to Eat), and be sure to find other items necessary to continue your fight --- body armor, helmets, ammo bins, etc...

IGN: Has it been pretty hard to design levels that are not only destructible, but allow for fair play for each of the three types of characters?

Jeremy Stieglit: Yeah, it's difficult. You essentially come to realize that the Bishop, who might seem very strong, isn't strong at all if there aren't enough things to manipulate around her. She looks really incredible with the things that she can do, but a good rocket to the face will kill her just the same. We've had to make sure there's an appropriate amount of interactive material in a level so that she always has something to grab onto. At the same time, we have to make sure that the guardian character that doesn't have any psychic abilities is able to get around the environment properly. We found that without some kind of massive leap he couldn't compete so we gave him a gigantic pneumatic jump so he can get to height and even pound the ground afterwards to send out a shockwave to clear the area.

Both from an environment standpoint and making sure that the characters are balanced enough that they're all able to kill each other is a bit of a challenge. It's one that's not entirely finished at this point. We'll find ourselves tweaking it until the release date.

IGN: So there's a crapload of stuff flying everywhere in this game. Are you guys going to require players to use a physics processor card?

Jeremy Stieglit: No, we're not going to require it in this game. There's still a lot of people that don't have the hardware that would probably still like to play the game so what we're effectively doing is splitting the content down the middle. So some will require the hardware and then there's some that will only get some additional elements added to it when the card is present.

CGW: Granted, you're still working this out, but what would you say an episodic game needs to do in order to ensure the attractiveness of subsequent installments? Making us care for a character and then setting us up for her seemingly impending death seems like a start....

DS: The main thing we want to do is move the Half-Life story forward meaningfully. We want our customers to realize that these episodes are the continuation of Half-Life and Half-Life 2 rather than optional detours from the main story line. Character and story are fundamental to the franchise, and we intend to keep pushing on those in every episode. Of course, we'll always keep the gameplay fresh and fun by introducing new NPCs, settings, and game mechanics.

Next Gen: Tell us about the new IP.

Todd Hollenshead: [Laughs] It's new, it's not Doom, Wolfenstein, or Quake. We're working on it now. Apart from it's going to going to be on a new John Carmack engine, from what I've seen internally, I think it's going to be met with a great deal of anticipation.

Next Gen: Why the secrecy? Previously, id's been extremely open with what they're doing.

Todd Hollenshead: There's not really any secrecy about it, it's just that we don't want to go out and say things that end up not being accurate later. And right now, the technology is in the R&D phase, so we don't want to go out and say things that will later to not be accurate, and have people say, 'well I thought you said this,' and 'why didn't that happen-'

FiringSquad: How will the single player campaign differ from previous Total War titles?

Bob Smith: I've already touched on what variety in gameplay the playable factions bring. Aside from this we've made some significant changes to the campaign game.

One of the biggest of these changes is that you'll now have to choose whether to develop each settlement on the campaign map as a castle or a city. Castles emphasize the military, and cities the economic. Build lots of castles, and your armies will be extremely potent. Build lots of cities, and you'll have to rely on dubious militias or mercenaries. On the other hand, you'll have the money to buy off your opponents. Castles will require less management than cities but as the game develops cities will become more important. Although you can switch between the two as the game progresses, redeveloping settlements will be costly and you could lose buildings as a result, so the transition will need to be carefully managed. As a result, there is a great deal more strategy involved as you expand your empire across the campaign map.

The campaign map itself will be busier with several new types of agents, including merchants, princesses and priests that offer increased interaction with rival factions and more options. For example, if you choose to develop a series of strong cities to provide financial stability, you can also recruit a number of merchants to venture into foreign lands to seize precious resources. You can even use merchants aggressively to takeover trade currently exploited by rival factions. Effectively, you can choose to dominate on the campaign map through a trade war.

Alternatively, you can enter into diplomacy to improve the experience and skill of your princesses and develop them as diplomatic weapons. Not only will they help you achieve an upper hand in negotiations, they can also be used to marry into opposing factions in order to snatch key members of their family tree away from them. Using a princess to take away a key general from a soon-to-be enemy is a new strategy you'll be able to explore in the campaign game.

Aside from this, later in the campaign the Americas will be unlocked. Initially these will be hidden from the players and the squares of the Atlantic Ocean will be impassible. Late in the game, players will be able to develop the technology to cross the ocean, discover America, and battle with the Aztecs. What the Aztecs lack in military technology they more than make up for in bravery and sheer numbers so while the Americas are there to be conquered, the Aztecs aren't likely to welcome unwanted visitors.

The new world has many unique and lucrative resources, such as tobacco and chocolate, not to mention gold. Dominating America will do wonders for your treasury and converting all those pagans will impress the Pope. Being so far away, the faction that can defeat the Aztecs and establish a base there will have a huge advantage defending it against other factions. The economic advantages that come from having a monopoly here will give that faction a huge boost dealing with the other old world factions. This single event will transform the latter part of the campaign and see players fighting in new environments against a very different opponent than they've been used to.

Shack: So on to an entirely different part of the game, nukes are obviously very powerful but there are presumably countermeasures and vast amounts of efforts that must be expended to use them. What's the system around that?

Chris Taylor: Well, I love nukes. I love nukes that do massive amounts of damage, but like anything there should be an easy way to counter it--relatively easy--meaning that if you build nukes, and your opponent builds anti-nukes you're never going to win the game that way. What people forget, though, in terms of strategy, is that nukes are not just meant to knock out your opponent's base. Let's take a scenario. I build up nukes, and you build anti-nukes. I fire five of them at you, and you knock them out of the air, and for every dollar I spend on the nukes you spend twenty cents. I'm losing this arms race. However, when you think you've got me beat, you have this invading army leaving your base and there's no anti-nuke capability escorting that massive army, and I drop a nuke on them and you say, "Oh."

As a strategist, I like to create what I call a red herring system, where people do something because they think it's going to be a slam dunk, and then they realize it isn't. That creates a lot of deeper strategies, because people start to say, "Well, my friend is not going to think I'm going to build nukes, because he knows that I'm going to build anti-nukes, which means he's probably not going to build nukes, which means I'm not going to bother building anti-nukes." You get into this whole "I know that you know that I know that you don't know" rabbit hole, which allows these chess-like games to evolve. You'll find the guy nuking the other guy and he'll say, "I can't believe you built nukes! You never build nukes! I've played you twenty times and you've never built nukes! Where did this nuke comes from?" and the first guy says, "Exactly." [laughs] It's just fun. It takes the game to a whole new place.

Then you can also drop nukes on ships in the ocean, and someone might say, "God, I never thought about you knocking out my ships with a nuke, I should never have kept them still," because if the ships are always moving you can never hit them. You'd never know where they're going to go. A nuke takes quite a while to get across a world, a nuke is in the air for a minute or two minutes, and you could move the slowest thing in that time. Nukes just really dress the game up and take it to a very exciting and interesting place.

Now, of course we have shield systems too, which take out all of your traditional projectiles--long range artillery can be protected against, the shields absorb various impacts. Then there are sorts of cool countermeasure systems. You've got stealth field generators, you've got spooking systems for your mobile units that can make it look like there's a massive army approaching on radar when there isn't, and so on and so forth. There are a lot of systems that make it all come together in interesting ways.

GameSpot: Give us a brief update on the development of Spore. What aspects of the game is the team working on at the moment?

Will Wright: We've basically got all the levels playable at this point, so we have a lot of tuning ahead of us, because we've finally integrated all the different styles of [gameplay]. At this point, it's basically iterating on the gameplay, doing a lot of tuning, finishing up some of the [art] assets, interface, design...stuff like that. So, in some sense, we're in the home stretch. Although the home stretch is pretty long nowadays (laughs).

GS: How big is the team at present? How much of the team is working on art, programming, artificial intelligence, design, and other areas?

WW: Our team is probably around 80 people right now. We have a disproportionately large number of programmers on this team and a small number of artists, because of all the procedural content. So, probably 40 percent of the team is programmers, which is pretty high. The art staff is probably about a third of the size of [the art staff assigned to] a typical EA game. And all our artists are very technical as well, so they're doing a lot of the programming and scripting.

FiringSquad: How does the game's strategy elements enter into Battlestations: Midway?

Klaude Thomas: Strategy elements such as the command map, unit orders, formation control, and repair crews are knit into the action gameplay. On the smaller maps you can safely ignore them and take direct control of the fight - an all-action type of game - but on larger maps where you are coordinating the action of multiple ships, subs, and aircrafts, you will find yourself swiftly making strategic adjustments and then jumping into personal control at the point of contact. For example, you might set up multiple bomber squadrons to overload a single target, then jump in and personally fly the key attack through the AA defense fire, or you might be in a destroyer that takes a hit to the fuel tank - setting her on fire - so you'll swiftly switch to your repair crew to douse the flames.

PS3 Land: I've heard that FaceFX is a feature in Unreal Engine 3, correct? How is it being used in the engine? Is it a plug-in?

FaceFX: Yes, FaceFX is included in Unreal Engine 3. The FaceFX SDK is compiled into the engine and is running in-game. FaceFX Studio is used from inside UnrealEd and uses an Unreal Engine 3 viewport. FaceFX is completely integrated with the engine: the artists have access to Unreal’s awesome material system to do things like animated normal mapped wrinkles, and FaceFX can be used from various Unreal systems like Unreal Script, Kismet, and Matinee. In Unreal Engine 3, FaceFX can drive bones, morph targets, and normal mapped wrinkles all simultaneously in real-time so you can get some very good looking facial animation without much effort.

TTLG: How do you induce players to reflect upon the morality of their own actions in an environment where survival overrides other goals? Is the existence of a Higher Authority passing judgment necessary for a system of morality?

Ken Levine: No, you just have to put the moral choice right in the player's nose. There have been lots of games where you make moral choices as follows:

Lord Doofus: So, Paladin, tell me this: Will you join the forces of light, or will you side with King Demonik's infernal army?

You: 1) Hook me up with that shiny plate mail! I'm your man, Doofus! Now can I have that scroll of Seraphic Summoning?

2) Screw you Doofus! I want me some of that hellfire? Now can you point me to the helpless widows and orphans?

What always bugs me about this is that it ignores the key component of what compels people to do nasty things: need. In BioShock, we put you in a terrible world that has exploited the weakest members of that world in horrible ways. Then we put you in a situation in which, in order to survive, it's pretty damn tempting to exploit the weak yourself. And there's no moral authority telling you what to do, what's right and wrong.

The people who exploited the Little Sisters in Rapture were motivated by ideology and their survival instincts. Any player who plays BioShock is going to be very tempted to exploit the Little Sisters, too, because now it's their life on the line. That's going to lead, I hope, to an understanding of how terrible things happen. It brings the player into the process of evil, and maybe makes them understand how terrible things happen, even when basically good people are involved.

This is going to sound quaint in the world of Grand Theft Auto, but I remember back when we were working on Thief…the original version of the mission where you're supposed to kill a local crime boss had you being hired by a bunch of merchants to assassinate the guy. They didn't like him because he was shaking them down and they wanted him dead. So your mission was to go into the guy's home and murder him, taking what you will along the way.

There were a lot of people at Looking Glass who were uncomfortable with this. So they insisted that the mission be rewritten that Ramirez tried to kill you first. I thought it was a cop out. Garrett wouldn't need to be motivated in self defense. He was motivated by money. That's what defined him.

FiringSquad: What elements will make Joint Task Force different than the typical RTS game?

Vincent van Diemen: It's the tactical approach. You get money, per mission and per objective. So, that is all you can spend. You have to spend your money wisely and since everything is delivered to you on the battlefield, you have to make sure they do not shoot the Blackhawk with your new troops out of the sky. Also, your troops gain experience and you can promote them to officer status. Officers have a skill tree so you can tailor them to your preference. There is even quite a bit of micromanagement if you think you deal with that better than the AI.

Q: Why did you change the classical Splinter Cell Multiplayer Formula?
A: Responsible for the two first Multiplayer Splinter Cell instalments, the team (Ubisoft Annecy and Ubisoft Milan) wanted to get further in the “Versus” experience. The main objective was to have more players online to continue their Single Player experience. The motto for the team was accessibility : how to understand easier, play faster and get the rules quicker. The team worked on a new formula for Splinter Cell Multiplayer in two directions : have fun within a few minutes and get a richer experience for SC fans. On Xbox and PS2, the players are now offered the Spy versus Spy Mode. On X360 and PC, the new Versus Mode and the Challenge Mode make a great use from the Hardware and Live! abilities. Thoses allow the team to provide the players with an online recruitment and progression experience as a secret agent.

Q : What will add the recruitment/progression to the game experience?
A: It makes every game more real to know that you're controlling your agent, with specific statistics, gear or team-mates. It provides great satisfaction to see your character improving or your ranking increasing. This pride feeling increase the addiction to the game. This also allows the team to offer different options to different player profiles : Do you want to achieve 100% of the objectives? Do you want to be on the top of the worldwide rankings with your team? Do you just want to give it a try? SCDA multiplayer offers it! To end with it, heavy community feedback report unfair games in the past. With the progression system and the team-ranking, the players will always play against equivalent gamers.

Q : In what extent will it be different from Pandora T. or Chaos T. ?
A: In the Spy vs. Spy mode, it is pretty obvious : both team are equivalent and have the same abilities : the objective is no more to know the maps or the use of every gadget, but to shoot, fight and move better than the others; a skill based Gameplay. On X360, the recruitment and progression system has deep consequences on a match : with a persistent agent, the game can't end when the objectives are taken : the spy has to escape the map to fulfil its objective, which adds a lot of tension. The team focused on the Escape Moves to make it spectacular and dangerous, like in famous robbers movies. On the other hand, the Upsilon Forces need new weapons to track and kill the spies. The Drones, very lethal gadgets, make the game more violent and more powerful for the Upsilon Forces. During the first games, the Challenge Mode allow the players to learn the basic game rules. But opposing bots with your team-mates, is also the best way to learn cooperation, teamwork and to improve. Multiple Challenges will allow diehard fans to test themselves against deadly AI, which is the only way to get the 100% mark on every map!

Shacknews: What are canyon duels? Tell us all about them, please.

Scott Nielson: The Canyon Duel is a 2 stage race. The player's car is in the "follow" position during the 1st stage and his goal is to stay as close as possible to the lead car without going over the edge of the cliff. The closer you can stay to the bumper of the car in front of you, the more points you'll score during this run. If you successfully reach the finish line, you will end up with a total score.

During the 2nd stage, the player's car is in the "lead" position and you are trying to get to the bottom of the run as fast as possible while putting as much distance as you can between you and your opponent. Your goal is to defend the score you put up in the 1st stage against your rival when the roles are reversed. Passing the lead car and staying in front for a specified amount of time results in an immediate win for the car that made the pass. On the other hand, falling too far behind the lead car for a specified period of time will result in an immediate win for the lead car.

IGN: It looks like portals can be created on hard stationary objects. Can portals also be created on soft bodies or moving objects?

Kim Swift: Portals can be created on any flat surface that is large enough for one of the portals to fit on: walls, floors, and ceilings. There is currently not an implementation for placing portals on moving surfaces at this date.

IGN: Will most of the puzzle challenges involve logical thinking as well as twitch shooter gameplay, as some of the later clips hint at? Will there be a hint option for those of us too stupid to figure the puzzles out on our own?

Kim Swift: We believe that it's very important to bring in a playtester every week to test through the game and this lets us know that the levels we create are reasonable. Doing multiple iterations on new content as soon as possible helps us ensure that players will have fun. In addition, like Half-Life 2 we have difficulty settings that will scale damage, accuracy of antagonists, etc.

IGN: Valve seems intent on creating smaller, more bite-sized quantities of content, the direct opposite approach that took place in Half-Life 1 and 2. What is Valve's strategy right now on episodic content? Will we see more? Are Episode 1-3 an experiment or they part of a long-term strategy?

Kim Swift: Because of episodic content, Valve has been able to take risks on games like Portal. It would be pretty dangerous to go and spend $10 million working on a brand new game mechanic, which is why lots of games tend to stay pretty close to what's been done before. With Portal, we have a small team working for a year, and we get to release it and hear people's reactions without having to take all the risk involved with a monolithic, multi-year, multi-million dollar project.

Shack: When you are relatively sure you've encountered a pirate, what do you do? How do you deal with the person?

Mike Russell: Actually, I contact their ISP [laughs]. I know it sounds silly, but ISPs have been a lot more responsive towards pirates than law enforcement has been. Most law enforcement sees piracy as petty theft. It's under a hundred bucks, it's piddly crap. But ISPs, they're really responsive towards pirates, because most pirates are the people who are munching all the bandwidth. So if they have, essentially, a legitimate excuse to boot a pirate off, they'll take it.

Shack: A common defense of pirates on the internet is that developers are going to receive relatively little of what people pay for games in the first place. I realize you might not be able to discuss a lot of this in detail, but can you discuss at all how developer compensation and royalties work for games released via retail versus Steam?

Mike Russell: I can't go into details on that, but I can actually address how it works for general titles, not SiN Ep. Generally what happens is that a developer is paid, say, $2-5 million to develop a product. When a unit is bought from the publisher, the publisher gets their cut, which covers cost of goods, testing on the publisher side, and so on and so forth. Then, a portion of that money from that sale goes towards what the developer was paid to make it, and it's only once that number reaches what the developer was paid to make the product, that the developer starts making money.

So, a good example is, if I'm working on a first party title with a $2 million budget, it takes about $15 million worth of retail sales before I break even. If I'm a developer, because of the way the royalty structure works, it can take about $40 million worth of retail sales before the developer sees a dime of their advance.

Shack: Speaking of that, at the time Riddick came out, you guys were not as well known as you are, and it was this big surprise. People were saying "Look at these Starbreeze guys, where did they come from?" What's it like now, working on a game when you have all these expectations, coming off of that release?

Jens Anderson: It's more fun, actually. We showed off this demo at E3, we had a great reception. A lot of people came in and said, "We were dying to see this game because we loved Riddick so much," and they wanted it to have a lot of similar elements. And as you saw, there are a lot of similar elements, with the genre being quite similar, and stuff like that. From what I've heard, very few people are disappointed, and, well, it feels really good to have Riddick to stand on. People are more interested than they were when we showed Riddick for the first time.

Shack: Finally, any chance this game will make it to PC?

Jens Anderson: Probably, I would say, but they would kill me if I said for sure. [laughs] No, we're focusing on the console versions and as you know, in Riddick after the release we did a port for PC, so I hope we will see it