"Behind The Code": D. Ray (Part 3/3)

DanQ · September 10, 2003, 22:35

The third and final part of the second "Behind The Code" interview set, where ex-Activisioners talk with Apolyton CS` (ACS) Locutus about the Call To Power series and in particular the second title in light of its pending source code release, is now online.

David "Pyaray" Ray was on the Call To Power II development team as a programmer alongside Richard Myers and Steve Mariotti. In looking back, he discusses his half-year on the Call To Power II development team. He relays the satisfaction he received working on the game and both the other people and the company behind it. He states that with the release of the CTPII source code, fans who choose to delve into it will gain some first-hand experience as to what is involved in such a project.

Comments on the first instalment are welcomed in this thread.

-------------
Dan; Apolyton CS

Tamerlin · September 11, 2003, 07:48

Very interesting article, Pyaray is doing his best to warn the modders it will be difficult to understand and alter the code.

But the said Source Code has not yet been released and I fear we will have to wait a long time before it is.

As far as I am concerned I would have prefered a less technical article about the philosophy and the concepts of CtP2... may be the topic of another serie of articles.

Locutus · September 11, 2003, 07:55

Quote:

As far as I am concerned I would have prefered a less technical article about the philosophy and the concepts of CtP2

Well, what kind of things would you like to know? I'm sure Pyaray is reading this, so you never know...

child of Thor · September 11, 2003, 14:34

well i'm guessing alot of the design stuff was probably sorted out before David Ray joined the team, and as mainly a programmer, i'm not sure how much of the design he would have been involved in. Still it would be interesting to hear how the design came about and what influenced the choices made.
I expect the designers had a keen interest in history like most of us on the forum.

centrifuge · September 11, 2003, 15:15

I just wanted to say thanks to Pyaray, for letting us have some insite into the minds of the creators.

...Also thanks to Locutus for soliciting the interviews

Pyaray · September 11, 2003, 16:06

Child of Thor has hit the nail on the head. If the questions revolved around design & philosophy, it would have been filled with "i don't know" & "no idea."

By time I joined the project, it was pretty much designed, and they were doing bug fixes and balancing. Since I'm not "into" design myself, the background for the reasons decisions were made was beyond my interest, so I never asked. Only a handful of features were added after I joined the team, and most of them were just extensions onto what was already there.

Pyaray

Dale · September 11, 2003, 21:29

Just wanted to comment that all the interviews were well done. A couple of missing questions to what I'd have liked to have seen, but overall, well done to Locutus and David and Winnie.

I answer the inevitable question that Locutus will ask me, here's my number 1 question.

Q: (probably more aimed at the designers than programmers)
I always found it a little disconcerting that Civ-styled games take on a Euro-centric or US-centric flow. IE: tech paths appear to be European/US based. My question revolves around the "other" areas of the world. Pre-European Americas had tribes with extremely advanced and civilised social structures. Also, a number of these tribes had advanced agriculture, government structures and laws. Some even had manufactoring being performed. Also too if we take Asia into account. No one will deny me the fact that China was THE most advanced civilisation on the face of the planet until two major events: Genghis Khan, and the Warlord wars in the 1600's. China knew of the Americas AND Europe before Columbus was a twinkle in his dad's eyes.

Why do civ-style games fail to represent these areas of the world, as I believe they offered the world a LOT more than they were credited with? Do these areas get dismissed because they were always alienated by the Catholics?

Pyaray · September 11, 2003, 21:42

Well, I'm not a designer, and can't fully give you an explanation why they decided to do it that way. But I can give you at least one reason.

You need a tech tree that goes all the way into the modern age. With the advancements along the ways being logical to what comes before and after. The US/Euro centric development is a continuous technology tree, where most other societies would progress only so far and then have a major US/Euro integration into their technology, making them not as "logical" when looking at it from a gameplay standpoint.

You're right, China was very advanced technologically. But at some stage (which I can't point at because history is one of my worst subjects) they had a massive influx of technology from what you call US/Euro influences.

And then another much more simple answer would be, all the designers are american, so that's the technology they know the best, and therefore it's the easiest to come up with and write the GL for.

Pyaray

Dale · September 12, 2003, 02:45

Thanks for the answer.

It is true what you say about all areas eventually converging on the Euro-US line. For China, that happened in the 1600's (again with that time for them) when the Portugese, Spanish and Russians found them. As for American-Indians, they pretty much just got assimilated by the Europeans, so there's the forced convergance.

I'll go out on a limb here and say that the following convergances occured during the time 1400-1800:

- North America: England, France, Russia
- Central America: Spain
- South America: Portugal, Spain
- Africa: England, Portugal, Oman
- Orient (Afghanastan to Thai penninsula): Russia, England, Turkey
- Asia: Russia, Portugal, Netherlands
- Oceania: England, France

That would pretty much complete the world's convergance to the Euro techline.

Any comments?

Pyaray · September 12, 2003, 04:37

Quote:

Originally posted by Dale
Any comments?

Not from me, I was just trying to offer a possible explanation.

Pyaray

Tamerlin · September 13, 2003, 06:53

Quote:

Originally posted by Dale

- North America: England, France, Russia
- Central America: Spain
- South America: Portugal, Spain
- Africa: England, Portugal, Oman
- Orient (Afghanastan to Thai penninsula): Russia, England, Turkey
- Asia: Russia, Portugal, Netherlands
- Oceania: England, France

Any comments?

If we consider the 1700 - 1800 era I think we can include England and France almost everywhere. I think the major convergences have been realized throughout the 19th century.

Quote:

Originally posted by Locutus
Well, what kind of things would you like to know? I'm sure Pyaray is reading this, so you never know...

Sorry Locutus I have only seen the replies to the thread today... and Pyaray has already answered that he is not the best person to be asked this kind of questions.

ebralph · October 4, 2003, 05:50

Quote:

Originally posted by Dale
Thanks for the answer.

It is true what you say about all areas eventually converging on the Euro-US line. For China, that happened in the 1600's (again with that time for them) when the Portugese, Spanish and Russians found them. As for American-Indians, they pretty much just got assimilated by the Europeans, so there's the forced convergance.

I'll go out on a limb here and say that the following convergances occured during the time 1400-1800:

- North America: England, France, Russia
- Central America: Spain
- South America: Portugal, Spain
- Africa: England, Portugal, Oman
- Orient (Afghanastan to Thai penninsula): Russia, England, Turkey
- Asia: Russia, Portugal, Netherlands
- Oceania: England, France

That would pretty much complete the world's convergance to the Euro techline.

Any comments?

This might go a bit off topic, but I read a good book about this subject from David S. Landes. In essence he shows that all cultures (the Chinese for example) not European or European derived stagnated somewhere along the line. Take the Chinese, as you pointed out they had been far more advanced than the Europeans had been and that for over centuries. At the same time he points out, that the Chinese culture and development didn't move for a long time, allowing the European countries to gain advances. I would suggest you read that book, I thought it had a lot of insights on that subject. It's called The Wealth and Power of Nations and was publisized by Random House.

That said, one can only hope that we do not become too compacent one day and stop developing our cultures....

Eddie