JINA


ss	HOME > JINA Interview

by maiko uchida

----Where were you born?

Mike Hartford, CT

----What were you like in school?

Mike I was a pretty shy kid in grade school; an alright student, but nothing stellar. I had a couple of good friends I hung out with, but mostly preferred to be in my room reading or drawing. I opened up a lot in college, but I was always something of a geek.

----What is your background as an architect?

Mike I received my B.Arch from Syracuse University in 1986, and then worked in Boston for a couple of years in a design and planning firm. Definitely not the most creative job in the world, and it drove me nuts, so I did the obvious and went back to school. I moved to Los Angeles in 1989 to get my Master's degree in architecture at the Southern California Institute of Architecture(SCI-ARC), which was a pretty liberating experience after the dry formality of the previous few years. Ironically, it was also the time that I realized I wasn't all that interested in architecture as a profession. I was drawing a lot, but I was more interested in the experience of architecture - atmosphere, drama and so forth, than I was in the process of building. Going into the movie industry would have been a natural next step, but I didn't see myself in the industry or Hollywood, so I ended up in 'entertainment architecture' instead, designing for museums and exhibitions. I did this for a few years before discovering computer graphics and animation.

----Why did you decide to work at "Microsoft Game Studios"?

Mike It wasn't so much a conscious choice as a matter of going where the jobs were. In 1996, when I first started getting involved in computer graphics, there weren't a lot of job options available for someone interested in 3D work, especially in Seattle. The game industry that had grown in leaps and bounds for the first half of the 90's, started collapsing on itself as small companies everywhere either folded or got bought up by larger companies, like Microsoft. I freelanced for about a year or so before landing a contract opportunity with Microsoft to work on a combat flying game. Then another year after that they hired me as a fulltime employee.

Mike was born in Hartford, Connecticut. He graduated Syracuse University in New York and received Bachelor degree in Architecture. After that he worked for a couple of years in Boston before moving to Los Angeles and receiving his Master's degree in architecture from the Southern California Institute of Architecture. Now Mike works in Xbox game development for FASA Studios, which is part of Microsoft Game Studios. His job title and description in FASA Studios is Environment Art Lead, and he is responsible for designing the scenery, architecture and other aspects of the environment for immersive 3D game worlds. His Japanese wife, Etsuko Ichikawa, is glass artist. His web site at www.eyefly.net and his wife's at www.etsukoichikawa.com were both designed by him.

----How did you get into designing game environments?

Mike For my first year and a half at MGS, I was working on Flight Simulator as a landmark modeler, which meant I was in charge of recreating significant buildings from around the world for use in the game. Interesting enough, but I was ready to move on after the first product cycle.

Then Xbox was announced, and one of the initial projects for our studio was to develop a firefighting game requiring detailed building design in a science-fiction environment. I jumped at the chance of course, and although the project didn't make it past prototype stage, I did manage to build most of a Victorian mansion that we all felt would burn very well. It was a start.

----What are some major differences in the design process between real-world and game-world architecture?

Mike I've addressed this question in lectures. To begin with, since there are no real building materials, physical laws or codes to deal with in game design, it's obvious that safety isn't an issue. In terms of process though, I see two primary distinctions. The first is program. In the real world, it is usually defined by a client with a specific set of needs - room functions, square footages, budgets, etc. In games none of this exists. The program comes from a script, a series of goals and activities that need to take place. From this, levels, or maps are created. In games you only build what you need. You don't worry about bathrooms and broom closets unless they're going to be used explicitly in the game.

Secondly, in games everything is designed as if it already exists. There is no pristine, ideal state, which is how all architecture is conceived. We design in the coffee stains, cheesy posters and bad furniture as part of the overall ambience, as these details are what help convey the reality of the experience. In fact to some extent, these considerations can be seen almost as opposite approaches. In games, building structure is largely decorative, you don't 'need' columns to hold up floors as real-world physics only works where it's programmed to do so. Whereas the curtains, furniture, carpets and lights are where the most of the attention is usually given, as these are things the player interacts with.

----How much of a personal flare or signature can you put into your designs? Is the design process pretty flexible or limited in what you can do?

Mike That depends on a number of issues. First, I work under an art director who determines the overall look and feel of the game. Depending on how much trust he places in me as a designer determines how much leeway I have. In my case, I'm given a lot, and I consider the buildings I make, my designs for the most part. On other projects however, I'm given reference material to work from and my stylistic contribution may come down to only building colors, specific materials or accents. Typically, I don't like those kinds of projects as they can be too restrictive. Fortunately in games, that's usually the highest priority - to make it look cool.

----In recent years, game environments have become more of a priority and often a sign of a quality game. What brought on this trend and do you think it will continue?

Mike Talent, technology, budget, and the growing sophistication of the audience. It used to be that game environments amounted to little more than corridor mazes with tiling textures plastered all over them. That was due to the fact that it was largely developers doing the art, and the fact that memory and processing capabilities were quite low. Plus the fact that a dozen years ago we didn't expect any better. Today, if you put out a game like that, you'd be lucky to give it away. Audiences have grown to expect immersive realism as the norm, and that demand is only going to grow. Twenty, thirty years ago, the military and industry drove computer technology while today its games. In fact, in many ways games are more complex to produce than movies; and although the budgets aren't quite there, they are growing by leaps and bounds. Today it's not unheard of to spend ten to fifteen million on development for a single game.

----What game do you consider to be the turning point in terms of environment design in games?

Mike That's tough, I don't think that there is a simple answer to that. If I had to pick one though, I'd probably say Myst. Although its interface was rather primitive, point-and-click, as opposed to true 3D,it was the first game to really paint a world that looked real and drew you in. The quality of art was very high and set the bar for a number of years.

----Which do you think is the greatest limitation of games - hardware, software, or budget?

Mike Probably budget, but not for the reasons you'd think. Games have become so expensive to produce that companies are less willing to risk their investment than they might have, say a decade ago. So in some ways its becoming more like Hollywood, innovation is being sacrificed for profit. Not technical innovation, in that regard the bar is always being pushed higher, but in terms of concept. Companies are usually much more willing to accept sequel after sequel of a known franchise than to try something new or daring, especially if it breaks the mold of standard game-playing, i.e., killing bad guys or playing sports

----Which of your game design works are you most proud of? Which one was most challenging?

Mike In the past few years I've had the opportunity to work on a number of interesting prototypes. I already mentioned the firefighting game, another was designed around a 30,000 mile high building ? talk about an architects dream! From a design standpoint that was by far my favorite.

Our most recent release, Crimson Skies 2, I'd have to say was most challenging though since it was the first immersive 3D game that many on the project team actually shipped. There were other environment designers on that one as well though, so I can't take a whole lot of credit for it.

----What is your dream?

Mike To make a game that redefines the notion of what games are. An experience that moves beyond the genre into something more challenging, emotionally resonant and intellectually engaging than what's out there right now. Personally, I think the potential of games is immense, but unfortunately we're mired in the need to satisfy gamers who are happy with killing monsters. The industry has a lot of maturing to do and until it takes itself seriously enough to rise above comic-book storylines, it won't be taken seriously as an art form.

----Do you really think Xbox can beat SONY PlayStation2;).

Mike Of course.

----Are you a gamer? If so, what is your favorite game?

Mike I always say I'm not, but admittedly I do occasionally get sucked into a game. I'm a big fan of role-playing adventure games, which sadly, is a dying genre, at least in this country. My all-time favorite (so far) was probably Obsidian, a relatively puzzle-based obscure game that only came out on the Mac many years back. Most recently, Splinter Cell was a lot of fun for its stealth-type of game-play.

::LINKS::
xbox : http://www.xbox.com/
any comment ? info@jinaonline.org