June 2006: World in Conflict - Interview
05, June, 2006
After heading to alien worlds with their two innovative Ground Control RTS games, developer Massive Entertainment is heading to the real world for their next strategy game...well, sort of. World in Conflict actually takes place in the modern world but in an alternate timeline where the Soviet Union never fell and decided to attack the US. FiringSquad got a chance to chat with Massive's CEO Martin Walfisz to find out more about their plans for World in Conflict.
FiringSquad: First, why did Massive want to switch gears from a sci-fi RTS game to a more modern day setting?
Martin Walfisz: Having worked on our own sci-fi universe for eight years we felt that it was time to explore a new setting. We contemplated doing a fantasy RTS for a while, but when the World in Conflict design concept was conceived it made immediate sense to place it in a modern day setting. It just fits the core philosophy of WIC: to make it accessible and comprehensible from the first few minutes you sit down and play. Contemporary military hardware is something that almost every hardcore gamer can immediately understand and relate to.
FiringSquad: Why did you decide to set World In Conflict in a alternate timeline where the USSR never fell?
Martin Walfisz: Once we knew that we wanted World in Conflict to be placed in a real world setting we put a lot of thought on what era to choose. Both World War II and the "middle-east-terrorists-attack-the-world" stories felt over-exploited. And we didn't want anything "near-future". Eventually it became glaringly obvious that having two superpowers fighting each other in an alternate history gave us so much cool stuff to pick from. In the 80s both the US and USSR had some of the coolest military hardware ever devised -- we just wanted to play with that.
FiringSquad: Some people might think that this kind of setting is similiar to what Westwood did for ther C&C: Red Alert games. How do you respond to this?
Martin Walfisz: Well, I think the only similarity is that both games have the USSR attacking the US. World in Conflict is much more serious and realistic than the Red Alert series. We're going to great lengths to ensure that the story we present feels plausible. And aiding us with the storyline we have Larry Bond, one of the world's foremost authors on Cold War politics and superpower military.
FiringSquad: What can you tell us about the backstory for the game itself?
Martin Walfisz: At this stage we're not saying much about the story or singleplayer experience (but please know that we have great stuff in the works). In short the backstory is that rather than accepting political collapse, the Soviet leaders decide to reestablish their former glory by [forcefully] liberating some European countries. As the story continues the Soviets eventually find themselves on US soil. And that's all we're revealing now. Stay tuned for a lot more info once we're closer to release.
FiringSquad: What will the playable sides be like in World in Conflict and how does the alternate timeline affect how these sides were developed in the game itself?
Martin Walfisz: We have the US, USSR and another group (that we’re not currently talking about) as three different factions. Everything is based on the real world so all sides will be very similar to how they were at the end of the 80s but obviously we've made some changes to ensure a balanced gameplay.
FiringSquad: What can you tell us about some of the more interesting units in the game and will there be more exotic units thanks to the alternate history setting?
Martin Walfisz: Currently I love the Apache Attack Helicopter (as part of the Air role) and the Russian Long-range Artillery (Support role). As for exotic units, you know, we found that reality is (in this case) better than fiction. Everything we have in the game is totally based on real-world hardware and I have never once felt that something is missing. I can't wait to have you see the barrage and other special effects that our weapons spew out. It just looks absolutely fantastic!
FiringSquad: The Ground Control series was always more action oriented than the normal RTS games. How does the action element in World in Conflict affect the gameplay?
Martin Walfisz: To some extent World in Conflict is even more action-oriented than our Ground Control games, but at the same time we have made it more accessible and easy to get into from the beginning. I'm actually hesitant to even call it an RTS since there are so many preconceived assumptions that come with those three letters. It may make more sense to just call it an Action-Strategy game. You know, it's funny, but every time we test the game with external gamers, it seems to appeal to FPS and action-junkies as much as it appeals to more traditional RTS gamers. It's just such an immediate experience that everyone gets it and has a fun time with it.
FiringSquad: What can you tell us about the plans for multiplayer in the game?
Martin Walfisz: That's a very big question. :) And there is so much to say about our multiplayer plans. But I'll try to keep it short (sort of): Everyone should know that multiplayer is at the very core of World in Conflict. We've put a lot effort into making the multiplayer and online experience immediately accessible and rewarding. We've also put a lot of thought behind how to support team efforts and I believe that there is no other strategy game that is so satisfying to play together with your friends. It's like a whole new layer just waiting to be discovered -- the closest comparison is probably to having a tight-knit team in Counter-Strike or Battlefield.
I also want to mention that World in Conflict is the only strategy game (as far as I know) that fully supports drop-in gameplay without putting players at an advantage or disadvantage. In other words, a player can join an on-going match at any time -- the way the gameplay mechanics are set up makes this seamlessly possible.
Finally, about our online community system, Massgate. We've completely rebuilt it to fulfill our World in Conflict needs. It has full support for matchmaking, chat, clans, tournaments, auto-patching and a lot more.And the number one priority has been to ensure that it must take less than a minute from starting the game until you're online in a match (including load times). I timed it the other day, it took 37 secs to start the game, log in to Massgate, find a suitable server and load the map that we're showing at E3. In other words, instant access!
FiringSquad: The Ground Control series were always some of the best looking RTS games of their time. What can you tell us about the visuals for World in Conflict?
Martin Walfisz: Great visuals is an area that we've always excelled in and I can safely say that World in Conflict will not disappoint. I'll spare you the tech buzz words, and just tell you that the stuff we have in the game rivals' most current FPS games.
FiringSquad: What other interesting elements can players expect in the game?
Martin Walfisz: The Tactical Aids are highly rewarding and can have a huge impact on the game – if deployed smartly. You’ll see Air Strikes, Bunker Busters, Paratroopers, and much more. And I can’t wait until you see the Tactical Nuke! :)
FiringSquad: What is the current status of the game's progress and when will it be released?
Martin Walfisz: We're still at pre-alpha but already have a lot of gameplay features and content complete. Things look good to complete it in time for a spring 2007 release. In any case, we've promised ourselves and our fans that we will not rush this game -- it will by far be the most polished title that Massive has ever created.
FiringSquad: Finally is there anything else you wish to say about World In Conflict?
Martin Walfisz: I just wish that you and everyone else get a chance to play the game soon. I can't wait to hear what people think about it. We have a big multiplayer beta test planned for later in the year, so stay tuned for more info on that.
Source: FiringSquad website
Author: John JCal Callaham