In my 20s, I became obsessed with the role-playing game 'Romance of the Three Kingdoms,' named after a classical Chinese novel, and later 'The Sims,' a life-simulation game, and 'StarCraft,' a science-fiction game.
ESports is a big part of 'StarCraft II,' and I think it adds a lot of longevity to the game.
'StarCraft II' is a really great game. It appeals to players on multiple different levels.
'Starcraft' was never designed to support multi-byte languages. In order to support more complicated languages like Korean or Chinese, you need two bytes of storage and 'Starcraft' only had one byte.
I retain what's interesting to me, but I don't have a lot of strategic depth.
Strategic planning is not strategic thinking. Indeed, strategic planning often spoils strategic thinking, causing managers to confuse real vision with the manipulation of numbers.
We can determine our strategic part or strategic options, but the strategic framework is something which will evolve from the interaction of world powers with each other.
I think almost all strategic problems could at least be improved upon if people would do more careful game-theoretic analysis. The reason game theory works in predicting is because people intuit how to behave game-theoretically.
The Thursday night game is by far the most difficult game to prepare for. You can't get into as much depth as you normally would in your game plan because you just don't have the time. You've got to jump right into the next opponent.
Life to me is the greatest of all games. The danger lies in treating it as a trivial game, a game to be taken lightly, and a game in which the rules don't matter much. The rules matter a great deal. The game has to be played fairly or it is no game at all. And even to win the game is not the chief end. The chief end is to win it honorably and splendidly.
We have zero strategic thinking out of our White House. And we have a national security structure that has lost its way when it comes to strategic thinking and strategic decision-making.
Arimaa's a better game than I thought. It follows a fairly sound approach to making the game difficult for computers.
What happens is once you start to understand football, you realise that it's not just about the physical side of the game and chasing after a ball. It's a strategic sport which requires a lot of intelligence. It's a very mental game.
I wouldn't say portraying a character in a film like 'Wanted' was easy. But it was fairly easier than playing a role where one is expected to emote more depth on screen.
Keep it simple, stupid. Good game design shouldn't keep you looking at the manual but should have enough depth where you feel like you bring something new to the game every time you play.
I'm always a player who has taken fairly rough treatment, to be honest. I think my time in Scotland typified that because I think there was one game where I set a record for being fouled ten or 11 times in a game.