Interview Matt Chat 246: Robert Sirotek on Wizardry 1-5

[Infinitron]

Tags: Matt Barton; Robert Sirotek; Sir-Tech; Wizardry II: The Knight of Diamonds; Wizardry III: Legacy of Llylgamyn; Wizardry IV: The Return of Werdna; Wizardry V: Heart of the Maelstrom; Wizardry: Proving Grounds of the Mad Overlord

Matt Barton's interview with Robert Sirotek continues in the latest episode of his show. This part of the interview is the most interesting so far, in my opinion, since it takes a broader view of the development of the series throughout the 1980s. Robert talks about the controversial decision to make character importing mandatory in Wizardry II: The Knight of Diamonds (which he eventually came to agree with), about the technical challenges of developing Wizardry III: Legacy of Llylgamyn (which was actually a typo that caught on), about the controversial decision to make Wizardry IV: The Return of Werdna "the hardest RPG in the world" (which he still doesn't agree with) and about the passing of the torch from Robert Woodhead to David Bradley in Wizardry V: Heart of the Maelstrom. He also discusses the roles of various other individuals in the development of the series, including Brenda Romero, his sister Linda Curry, and also Andrew Greenberg, towards whom he is about as charitable as you might expect.

​

There is one gaffe, however, when Robert describes Wizardry VI as "the first game to combine fantasy and science fiction". Uh, yeah, not by a long shot. You could have called him out on that one, Matt.

 

[Crooked Bee]

I'd say he downplays Greenberg's importance quiiite significantly. It's so obvious it's plain laughable.

 

[Infinitron]

I'd say he downplays Greenberg's importance quiiite significantly. It's so obvious it's plain laughable.

Yes, that sentence was meant to be sardonic; I was surprised that he paid him any compliments at all.

 

[GlutenBurger]

These days there are bigwigs sitting in lavish offices using his argument about Wizardry IV in support of quest compasses and recharging health meters.

Hopefully Matt's teaser at the end is alluding to juicy Greenberg gossip for the next video.

 

[Crooked Bee]

I'd say he downplays Greenberg's importance quiiite significantly. It's so obvious it's plain laughable.

Yes, that sentence was meant to be sardonic; I was surprised that he paid him any compliments at all.

Wasn't sardonic enough!

I also find it ridiculous that, like you noted, Matt doesn't even try to follow Sirotek up on any of his replies, if only to maintain some kind of meaningful dialogue. His questions are mostly very trite, too.

 

[Infinitron]

Wasn't sardonic enough!

Already fixed, Frau Editor.

 

[Doctor Sbaitso]

It would be nice if Matt didn't always pitch lobs. Still pretty cool to have these interviews at all.

 

[rpgcodexusername]

Thing is, as an interviewer you dont want a guest to cut off the interview. You also dont want other potential guests to see Matt as a 'Hardball' interviewer and not come on the show.

You can only be 'Hardball' if your show gives a big advantage to the guest, ie millions of viewers. Otherwise the guest is doing you a favor and can end the interview whenever they want.

 

[Doctor Sbaitso]

Thing is, as an interviewer you dont want a guest to cut off the interview. You also dont want other potential guests to see Matt as a 'Hardball' interviewer and not come on the show.

You can only be 'Hardball' if your show gives a big advantage to the guest, ie millions of viewers. Otherwise the guest is doing you a favor and can end the interview whenever they want.

I don't think hardball would work either but I find myself hoping a subsequent entry at least touches on the large elephants just off camera.

 

[Daemongar]

I suppose he could avoid the "Hardball" monicker by sending out questions or some kinda framework beforehand. That is, we'll talk about each game, and here are five questions about each game. The questions do the dirty work, and the guest has a chance to prepare. May not be as good as an angry guy yelling at Matt, but at least the questions are brought up and the person has the chance to respond. It would be a start, but maybe he does this already and the guest crosses out the questions they don't want to answer. Or maybe Matt is just disorganized and doesn't prepare all that well. I don't know.

 

[Humanity has risen!]

Crooked Bee you should suggest Matt on Twitter to interview Robert Woodhead or Andrew Greenberg.

 

[Doctor Sbaitso]

I suppose he could avoid the "Hardball" monicker by sending out questions or some kinda framework beforehand. That is, we'll talk about each game, and here are five questions about each game. The questions do the dirty work, and the guest has a chance to prepare. May not be as good as an angry guy yelling at Matt, but at least the questions are brought up and the person has the chance to respond. It would be a start, but maybe he does this already and the guest crosses out the questions they don't want to answer. Or maybe Matt is just disorganized and doesn't prepare all that well. I don't know.

Quite right but without any information to frame what we are seeing we can only guess and wonder. It's not like Matt's audience is a casual one - I'm sure a significant percentage would like a little more meat than a pleasant retrospective and warm-fuzzies, because really there is a larger story than the videos suggest.

 

[Gary Indiana]

If you read between the lines, you see that Robert Sirotek has an account on the codex.

 

[Crooked Bee]

Thing is, as an interviewer you dont want a guest to cut off the interview. You also dont want other potential guests to see Matt as a 'Hardball' interviewer and not come on the show.

You can only be 'Hardball' if your show gives a big advantage to the guest, ie millions of viewers. Otherwise the guest is doing you a favor and can end the interview whenever they want.

Thanks for the Interviewing 101 lesson!

Having meaningful questions and following up on the interviewee's responses != "being a hardball."

 

[rpgcodexusername]

Thing is, as an interviewer you dont want a guest to cut off the interview. You also dont want other potential guests to see Matt as a 'Hardball' interviewer and not come on the show.

You can only be 'Hardball' if your show gives a big advantage to the guest, ie millions of viewers. Otherwise the guest is doing you a favor and can end the interview whenever they want.

Thanks for the Interviewing 101 lesson!

Having meaningful questions and following up on the interviewee's responses != "being a hardball."

Mr Sirotek seems to give as much detail as he is able.

Which question or answer do you think required follow-up?

When I was watching the interview I didn't really feel like anything was left out.

I dont think it would be productive to contradict him on a point that isn't that important "we made the first scifi-fantasy RPG!" "we were the first to put games in boxes!" and set up a more hostile atmosphere. Most people know it isn't correct anyway. It's not like this guy affects public policy, he is just a guy who used to publish some RPG games products.

 

[DashiDMV]

Better get some inside info on the Smoojer or this was all a waste a time.

 

[Crooked Bee]

Which question or answer do you think required follow-up?

Pretty much all of them.

 

[rpgcodexusername]

Which question or answer do you think required follow-up?

Pretty much all of them.

KAY