Hello, man. We're continuing our on-going quest to prove, once and for all, that all games based on films are unquestionably awful. Yes, it's a terrible generalisation to make, but we're so young and wild and reckless that we just don't care! This week, Louis Castle of Westwood games - the developer responsible for the reasonably decent Blade Runner - continues to talk the big talk.

MOVIE LICENSED GAMES ARE GENERALLY TERRIBLE - DISCUSS
Most licensed products are a shallow attempt to sell units based on the familiarity of the work. Unfortunately, it works. That is why so few people put a great deal of effort into a licensed game.

I feel you should always seek to expand the licence when you plan a product for it. Even in toys, books and other derivative works it is crucial that the experience is built on. Any parasitic attempt to cling to a popular licence will degrade the licence, and may eventually destroy its appeal and value.

WILL YOU DO ANOTHER MOVIE LICENSED GAME?
Maybe. That depends on the film and what it means to me. I need to see a REASON to do an interactive game based on a film. In Blade Runner, I desperately wanted to be in the world shown in the film. I wanted to make the decisions and try to find the fine line between what is real and what is fake. To try and find what makes a human, human. That is a great reason to make a game since you can explore the choices deeply in an interactive world.

HOW MUCH INPUT DID THE MOVIE STUDIO HAVE INTO THE GAME? They were involved with us the entire time. Interestingly enough, they had few edits. In fact, I think we have an equally deep understanding of the film, and its message as many of the people who worked on it. That helped us to understand what was right and wrong for the property without having to run to them with each question. In the end it was a wonderful, creative partnership with each group contributing ideas.

WHAT ARE THE ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF DOING MOVIE LICENSED GAMES?
The advantages are all about having a great deal of material to build from. The disadvantages are all about having to live within the world defined by another group of creative people.

The licence can be frustrating since you have to make sure your story, ideas and expansions fit within the world envisioned by the original creative team. Once you understand the property knowing that it does not fit is not the problem, finding something that does is always a challenge.

The better the original work, the harder it is to fit within it. Blade Runner was a masterpiece, and consequently, it was very difficult to get right, but easy to see when it was wrong.

WHICH IS EASIER - A MOVIE GAME, OR AN ENTIRELY ORIGINAL ONE?
A well done licensed product is just as difficult to create as a well done non-licensed product. The difference is that you have a point of departure on a licensed product.

It is very much like making a sequel to a hit you have created in the past. It is both easier and more difficult. It depends on what part of the production you are examining.

ARE THERE ANY PLANS FOR A FOLLOW-UP TO BLADE RUNNER?
We are considering it. The product is wildly successful and commercially makes sense to sequel. However, we have to be convinced on the creative side that it is right to sequel it. We have some ideas, but they are not firm at this point.

ARE THERE ANY PLANS FOR ANY FUTURE MOVIE GAMES FROM WESTWOOD?
Westwood has been making games for 13 years. I'm sure that at some point we will do another film-licensed product. At this time, we are busy with one and the full plate of original product under development.

All I can say is that if we do, when we do, it will be because we had a game which just had to be made based on a film property. We don't have enough time to do all our own ideas for products so we would only do a film licence if it was just too great a creative opportunity to pass up.

THANKYOU, CASTLE!