On 2009-08-29, Joel wrote:
Ooh, tough question! First of all, my own experience of the interviews is that they build on each other: not intentionally, just that they have a cumulative effect on my understanding, with new bits about Dogs and play and design in general “popping out” to me in my listening. My big lightbulb in the AA talk was Vincent’s description of what Dogs is about (“Kids with Bibles and guns solving problems that can’t be solved with Bibles and guns”). So when he said that in your interview, i’d already internalized it, and that made space in my brain for the new insight about Gms and follow-up conflicts.
That said, I thought your interview had really good and savvy questions. Your understanding of Dogs—both how the game works and the themes that it evokes—seemed a bit deeper than that of the AA guys, which enabled you to drill down further into its crust.
And hell, this is only part 1, isn’t it? Can’t wait for the rest!