1. If there were one moment from gaming you'd put in a time capsule to represent the 20th century of interactive entertainment, what moment would it be and why?

Justin: I'd have to say it was when I finished Full Throttle and watched Ripburger falling into the canyon with the license plate clutched in his helpless paws. A license plate that read, "You can't beat a Corley." That was pretty awesome. It may sound strange, but I think that was one of the most brilliantly written games I've ever played. It was the game I wanted to make, and in many ways, it was better than I could have ever imagined. I was pretty humbled by it.

Most games are linear in their story telling, or they try to be "interactive," giving you different avenues to explore and perhaps different endings. But most miss the fact that irony, subtle foreshadowing, and restraint are important. If you ever have a chance to inspect the story structure in that game, do it. That game was full of irony, intelligence, and great characters. That was some damn good writing - something I think we in the game industry must take to heart if we want to have compelling stories in our games.

2. Do you think the gaming industry is underestimating one aspect of interactive entertainment that will take us all by surprise in the early 21st century?

Justin: I feel that the industry is always underestimating something. It's only natural in any industry, especially one that is creative as well as corporate. If we didn't underestimate it, it wouldn't take us by surprise. And time and time again, we are surprised at what sells or why. Most publishers are far too reactive than they should be. Meaning that they only make games that have proven to be successful. Unfortunately, they usually miss the mark and make really disappointing copies of good games. Most of the time, those failures could have been so much more - I won't even get into disappointing story rip-offs or licensed properties.

Next: Justin Chin (cont.)