Interview with Mike Huber, director of "Perils of Man"

Thanks for an interesting interview Peter!

Thanks Jenny.

Ana

Thanks, Peter!

Jenny!

Nice interview Peter. Thanks Jenny.

Thanks to Jenny, Marita, Ana, and the team at GameBoomers for help with this interview!

Thanks for the interview, Peter and Jenny. I'm looking forward to the PC version next year.

I'm having trouble understanding why using a "Risk Atlas" device that "can foresee any kind of potential danger" is a "MORAL" choice. Obviously you can't avoid EVERY kind of potential danger even if you stay home, lock yourself in the closet, and don't do anything at all (you'd starve to death). Being able to foresee all possible risks doesn't necessarily mean you won't take some risks. Even if the Risk Atlas provides you with weighted risks (danger of starving to death is greater than danger of food poisoning), you don't necessarily choose the one with the least risk -- the one with greater risk might be more fun or have greater potential for making new friends or some other benefit. So unless using the "Risk Atlas" comes with the absolute requirement that you obey its evaluation and take the least risk, I don't see how using it would be a "MORAL" choice.

Thanks very much, Peter. Interesting read.

Jenny

This is my two pennyworth on why one could consider there's a moral thread to "Perils of Man" and its risk atlas. I'm not saying you should see a moral dimension in there, the gameplay may not focus on this angle.

The Risk Atlas effectively gives you choices in certain situations, choices as large as people living or dying. That knowledge is power. If you start to choose who lives, who dies, then I would say morality comes into the equation.

Wouldn't being made aware of a risk that your actions might cause people to die be preferable to not knowing the action had that risk?

That's the immediate attraction of something like the Risk Atlas if it existed.

Thanks, Peter!
Jenny.