Interviews by an Optimist # 60 - Larry Harris
Larry said this about himself…
Work History:
I have been designing games for the past 25 years.
Recently I have been working as an independent game designer. My main focus "will be" developing game concepts for both the board game and computer game industries.
I've had an extensive career working as a designer. Companies I've worked for include: Milton Bradley, Mattel, Coleco, Parker Brothers, Hasbro Games Group, Hasbro Interactive and Infogrames Interactive and finally Atari. Presently running Harris Game Design.
Games:
I have worked on many games over the years. During my first year at Milton Bradley, 1984, I had 13 games of my design featured in the company's catalog. This included the then brand new "Game Masters Series". All these games were of my design. My design credits range from Mr. T board game to Computer and Console games that I'm not yet at liberty to discuss. I personally own several IP's , including the Axis & Allies franchise. My expertise is "mass market" product with strong brand recognition. I love the creative process and always strive to "Wow" the final users of my creation.
Personal Interest:
I play lots of board and computer games with a particular interest in strategy games. Reading, with a particular interest in military history. I have lived extensively in Europe and the Middle East. I speak fluent French. I'm an Army veteran with 5 years service. I am also an ultra-light pilot.
Tom Vasel: Why do you think Axis and Allies enjoyed a much greater success than the other games in the GameMaster series?
Larry Harris: I'm not sure. Perhaps because of the subject - World War II. Perhaps because it dealt with the entire global struggle, but that would not account for the commercial success of Axis & Allies Europe, Pacific and D-Day. I think the secret is in the simplicity of the Axis & Allies game mechanics. Another game of mine, Conquest of the Empire, also has these simple mechanics. It also allows for the social interaction of several players. In both games there is a game that goes on above and beyond the gameboard. Do you know what I mean? Both games allow for smack-talk and role playing. None of these features are unique to Axis & Allies or Conquest of the Empire however. I don't know the answer. Perhaps there's no specific answer. Perhaps it's a combination of elements. It kind of reminds me of a good mix of chemicals that when combined make for a good end product. These games just strike a nerve I guess. The fact that Axis & Allies has been around since the 1980's also helps. It has become a classic in the industry. Once a game becomes a classic people feel comfortable with it and like Monopoly seem to be born knowing how to play it! Conquest of the Empire did not enjoy the same number of years on the store shelves. Some marketing decisions that had nothing to do with sales caused it to stop being published soon after its initial release. Eagle Games has just republished Conquest of the Empire this month. It was presented for the first time in 20 years at this year's Origins. People love this game. It now is on its own road to becoming a "Classic." Did you see what Eagle Games did to this game? It's truly beautiful in all aspects.
Tom Vasel: As I looked over my copy of Conquest of Empires tonight, I noticed two sets of rules - one by you, and the other by Glen Drover. Can you briefly talk about the differences in the games, and which do you prefer?
Larry Harris: In talking about the difference between the two sets of rules let me put it this way. The original set of rules has fewer in-game options (due to limited infantry movement for example) but more room for "above the table" discussion/negotiation, which I love in a game. The new set of rules, influenced by Martin Wallace's Struggle of Empires, has more in-game options (more movement, cards, influence) but somewhat limits the above the table discussion/negotiation (for example the alliance is locked for the campaign season, and you cannot attack an ally).
The two sets of rules make for an interesting dynamic. I don't prefer one set over the other. It very much depends on my mood at the time. The classic set of rules is probably easier in the beginning, but as the game develops the negotiations get more intense and probably longer. The new set of rules has more information to absorb at the beginning, but in the long term will probably play as fast because there is less of a need for the "above the table" discussion.
Tom Vasel: What do you think about articles on the internet that dissect Axis and Allies down to a fine science, such as "you must build such and such on your first turn, and attack here...", etc.?
Larry Harris: Great question… What I really like is how well Axis & Allies stands up to these dissections. I never approach game design as a fine science. The possible exception to that statement is reverence for the game’s math. A&A and indeed most of all my games are firmly based on math. I find that funny because I’m certainly not any kind of mathematician. There’s a circle of life in these game. I think this comes through when you really take an in-depth look at what makes them tick. You control a certain number of territories that provide a certain number of IPC’s which in turn permit you to purchase a certain number of weapons and/or units to defend your territories and with a bit of luck acquire even more territories. No weapon is too good a deal or value in comparison to what you pay for it, and no weapon is not worth what you pay for it. There are some who will argue with me about this, but all in all the math works great. All this represents a very delicate balance of plus’s and minus’s.
As for the “you must build such and such on your first turn” etc… Again A&A has had the good fortune of being able to stand up to this line of thinking. And believe me, I count my blessings in that regard. Over the years there have been a couple of times that I thought that the “game-busting” strategy had been found. Inevitably, someone always came up with an antidote or a counter strategy.
Tom Vasel: So what games can we expect to see from you in the future?
Larry Harris: What games can you expect to see from me in the future… I want to continue what I call the Big Battle Series of Axis & Allies. Axis & Allies D-Day, which just won “Gamers' Choice Award,” is what I consider the first in a series of major World War II battle games. I can’t be very specific, but at the moment I’m working on a major battle that took place in the Pacific. If I have it my way this series would include such epic battles as Stalingrad, The Battle of the Bulge, Market Garden and so.
I have a head full of other games as well. Eagle Games just came out with the re-make of Conquest of the Empire. Have you seen what Glenn Drover did with this game? It’s absolutely beautiful, stunning. Is “breathtaking” a descriptive adjective? I want to work with Eagle Games in the future. Not only to do extension to Conquest but also as an outlet for other ideas I have.
Wizkids is another company that has impressed me. They too do amazing products. Great people and their fearless leader, Jordan Weisman, is a genius. I have some ideas for them as well. I can’t get into specifics. Most of the publishers want to keep future products under wraps until just the right moment. It’s all part of their marketing strategy. I respect that.
I guess the best answer I can give you is… I’m busy designing and I’ve never felt more excited about it.
Tom Vasel: Do you think Eagle Games is the true successor to the Gamemaster games series?
Larry Harris: I see a lot of the Gamemaster series in the Eagle Games line up of product. Yes, Eagle Games is the successor to the Gamemaster series. This company came out of no where and suddenly they were there with games that had plastic pieces and giant game boards. They all had strong historical slants and themes. I tip my hat to Eagle Games – Job well done.
At the same time Wizards of the Coast has picked up the torch and Avalon Hill is alive and well. I do think they are trying to adjust and get in touch with the realities of today’s adventure board gaming. I’m not sure how this will all pan out. Personally I don’t think either company should move towards the “European” type of games. They should be true to their heritage. To their roots.
Tom Vasel: What is your opinion of "European" games? How have they affected the board game market?
Larry Harris: They don’t capture my imagination. I often don’t fine the game play to match the theme. These “European Games” are not my cup of tea, but I don't collect Magic cards either. Don’t get me wrong. I think they are full of depth and very cleaver as far as game mechanics go. I must say that they are almost always beautifully made. The game components are usually wonderful. You can feel the creativity that went into them. I have no favorite.
Tom Vasel: Do you think that there is a perfect mix of American and German games that is waiting to be made?
Larry Harris: If there is ... Alan Moon would have already found it.
Tom Vasel: Prior to designing Axis and Allies, what games and game designers had influenced you the most?
Larry Harris: Well, it certainly was Avalon Hill, and more specifically Gettysburg and Waterloo. I loved the notion that those little cardboard chits represented historical units and that I could control their movements and attacks. I could recreate their story and even change it. I remember rolling a die and experiencing the magic of it all. Running my index finger along a combat and ratio chart. Cross referencing until I got a combat results. Contemplating the impact of the result. Contemplating the human side. The historical implications. These games really made you stop and think. There was so much more there than met the eye. It was a sort of “hands-on-history” lesson . Remember - it was all brand new back then. But even today and everyday, the discovery of "War Games" occurs by some kid somewhere. Aaah, that first time. Models, the plastic kind, were big when I was a kid. Maybe they still are. I don't know. In any case there seemed to be two category of boys. The ones who built plastic car models and the ones who built warships and planes. I was certainly one of those warships and planes kids. Back when I was coming of age, we did not know who the designers of these games were. The fact that it was Avalon Hill was enough. I loved how the games seemed so sophisticated. They were actually bland and very dry. Certainly these were made for adults and here I was, far from being an adult, enjoying them.
I remember spending hours and hours playing with Milton Bradley’s American Heritage series – Battle Cry, Broadsides and Dogfight come to mind. Eventually I redesigned each of these games to my own liking. Those little plastic blue and gray army men of Battle Cry, they absolutely captured my imagination.
What if you took the complexity and the historical value of the Avalon Hill games and mixed them with the great playing pieces of the American Heritage series? Now that would be the type of games I could really get into.
Tom Vasel: Axis and Allies is, without a doubt, one of the most well known games in the world. Love it or hate it, most gamers have played it at one point or another. Do you think you can and will ever design another game that has the sheer popularity of that one?
Larry Harris: That's a big order. Nonetheless, I am sure there are a couple of big ones left in me. I am moving in several directions at present. There are a couple of games that I'm working on presently that look and feel very promising. Conquest of the Empire is one such game, but there are a couple of others that I can't discuss at this point.
Tom Vasel: Your war games are mostly on the "light" side. Do you prefer that to heavier simulations?
Larry Harris: Heavier simulations - to me that's another way of saying: Let's all go to the dentist office. It was the heavy simulation "3rd Reich" that pushed me over the edge and made me go design my own games. I could not dedicate the amount of brain time it required to learn enough about the game to ever enjoy playing it. I think "Light" games are often "Light" because the designer made a little extra effort and introduced some good doses of "Intuitiveness," and figured out that the average player does not really care how much gas is in every jeep and tank in a given Division.
Often what a heavy simulation deals with is simply not necessary in order to have a good enjoyment factor. Things that require paragraphs of explanations can and often are dealt with in the mind of the player. He fills in the blanks with his imagination. He connects the dots and does not need several pages of rules telling him how to do that. I also find that many rules, complex rules, are often created to make a game work rather than to make it fun.
I'm sure there's a place for heavies, probably in Graduate School. I'm sure heavy simulations are appreciated by some. There is a need for them. But as for me, I like to keep it simple stupid.
Tom Vasel: Do you extremely light war games, such as Risk, or do you think they have too much luck?
Larry Harris: Of course you can go too far in the "luck" direction. Some might think Risk is based too much on luck. For sure luck plays a role, actually a big role. But if I have 10 armies and you have 6, I'm probably going to win. In Axis & Allies I'd like to think that you get what you pay for. Three IPC's for an infantry unit that gives you a 1/2/1 and five IPC's for an armor unit that gives you another statistic -3/3/2. You can expect certain results from your dice over the long run. Much like you can expect your Queen in chess to be more powerful than one of your Pawns or even one of your Bishops. Another factor to take into account is what I call the level playing field. Even if an out come is derived from "luck", that's ok with me as long as we are all playing within some identified and equally established parameters. "Luck" is nothing to scorn. When referencing to history as the setting for game, as I often do, I can think of nothing more prevalent in all the worlds great events than "Luck". How about that weather forecast on June 6th, 1944? How about the battle of Midway? Talk about luck! How about a game of Yahtzee, anyone?
Tom Vasel: Do you think that plastic pieces are better than cardboard counters?
Larry Harris: Not always... Playing a game should be an experience. More precisely, you should be experiencing a certain situation or presented certain problems that make you feel like you are actually participating in the theme you are recreating. Look at Monopoly. Do you think the game would be the same without those little green houses and those red hotels? I think they bring so much to the game. Those are your houses, your hotels, and there they are right there on the board. Monopoly money actually becomes valuable after a while. The company that printed the game took the time and expense to make it look and feel that way.
I often want to create a "War Room" look and feel with my strategy games. The right pieces on the map tie it all together. They help generate that desired look and feeling. Can you do this without plastic pieces? Sometimes. Another way of looking at this issue, from a designers point of view, is asking the question - What game components will best enhance this gaming experience? Those are the game components that should be used. Of course cost often becomes the issue. I think a publisher should put the very best game components it can in a game. What those components are depends in a large part on what the game is.
Tom Vasel: What would be your advice to aspiring game designers?
Larry Harris: First I'd get a box of crayons. The big box with the sharpener built in. I'd make 100 perfectly round circles and color each circle a different color. These will be the "oh's" for your tic-tac-toe game that you will play with yourself. Now make the "X's". Again 100 and each a different color. As soon as you have played 100 games, set all these documents on fire and begin again. Do this everyday for 5 to 8 years. Oh yeah, I almost forgot... Write a different set of rules for each of your 100 tic-tac-toe games. Or, you can of course take the less artistic and more physical approach. Find a wall, the harder the better, and continue banging your head against it until your dead or cured from your affliction of wanting to be a game designer.
On the other hand you could start your own game company and design all the games you can afford to make. My point... This is a tough business to be in. Success is far from assured. I do think you need natural talents that can't be taught. You either have them or you don't. If you do have these talents - you know it. You feel it. In that case just design and don't let any thing or person get in your way. Make it happen. Pay attention to the details. Be original. Remember you are creating something that should be intended to entertain. Good luck... you'll need it.
You could always become a computer game designer... anybody can do that.
Tom Vasel: Larry, how did you initially get companies to notice you and your games?
Larry Harris: One day I got up, dragged a comb across my head. Went down stairs and had a cup. Suddenly it occurred to me that I was doing ok as a game designer in Europe and wondered how I would do in my own country. America!
I packed my bags and headed home after having been away for 10 years. What was intended to be a 3 month summer vacation after having just got out of the Army turned into 10 years in Paris. It was time to return to the United States. At this point in my life I also finally knew what I wanted to be when I grew up. I wanted to be a GAME DESIGNER.
I decided to settle in Connecticut. That's were I was from originally. I brought with me many game ideas and was anxious to show them around. I made several trips to New York to visit SPI and Avalon Hill and others. No one was particularly interested in my stuff. I occasionally visit a local game store in Groton, Connecticut. The Citadel. It was owned and operated by Pat Flory. I think he still has a game store in Groton. In any case to make a long story short Pat told me that next Thursday night a game company was coming by to present a game to the store and asked me if I wanted to present any of my games to them. That was how I met Nova. They were riding high back in those days. They had just come out with a wonderful game called Ace of Ace's. I showed them my game 1942. They loved it, and we decided to rename it Axis & Allies. I think Pat Flory came up with the name.
We went to contract. They sold some games. It was not an overwhelming success. Frankly it didn't look too good. A paper map and some really strange shaped die-cut cardboard counters.
Later that year I was approached by a Head-Hunter that told me that Milton Bradley was looking for an experienced and published game designer. Aaah, Corporate America! Medical insurance, retirement plan, steady pay check… I'll take it. I was working there for 2 weeks when my new boss asked me to explain what these hobby games, Avalon Hill type stuff was. I put together a presentation. I included Axis & Allies, Conquest of the Empire and Broadsides and Boarding Parties in the presentation. It turned out that Milton Bradley wanted to try out this new gaming area. They offered to license the 3 games I created. They made me an offer I could not refuse. There was one catch. I had already licensed Axis & Allies to Nova. I called Nova and asked them to join with me and sub license A&A. They of course agreed, and the rest is history.
I not only was getting paid to develop my own games but was also receiving royalties. This was unheard of in the business. I was what was known as an "In House Designer". That's a guy or gal that designs games for a major game company. Today most of these positions are filled by Industrial Designers right out of art school. They do this for a salary but never receive royalties. Well that changed. At the 1984/85 Toy Fair in New York I had an entire huge room to myself where I presented the original Gamemaster Series for the first time. This was truly a Cinderella story.
Tom Vasel: How long did this last? What caused you to eventually leave Milton Bradley?
Larry Harris: That is a great question. I was there just a couple of years. I absolutely loved the place and the people I was working with. My first year there I managed to place 13 game designs in the 1985 catalog! This ranged from the Gamemaster series to Her Self the Elf and Mr. T.
I was in love with the toy and game industry, and I wanted to feel it. I wanted to participate in it in a big way. I did not want to get stuck and locked-in to one job. Mattel offered me a job as a designer. I could remain on the East coast and not have to move to LA. The money was amazing, and the people I would work for were great people I already knew. I jumped ship. Another factor came into play as well, Hasbro had just bought Milton Bradley, and things were going to be changing. I was sure it was time to move on. WHAT WAS I THINKING. I learned a lot at Mattel. I managed the game design effort and reported to a Vice President, but I missed Milton Bradley terribly.
Nonetheless I had to move on. I probably should have stayed at MB for a few more years, but like I said, or tried to say. I wanted it all and I wanted to suck in as much of the industry as I could.
Over the years I have worked for a long list of major game companies. Coleco - do you remember them? Parker Brothers was where I worked the longest, 12 years. That was another great company. Eventually it all came full circle. Hasbro acquired Parker Brothers! Milton Bradley's R&D moved to the Parker Brothers building just North of Boston, and once again I was working with Milton Bradley as part of the Hasbro Games Group.
Eventually I opted once more to move on. This time it was to Hasbro's computer game arm. Hasbro Interactive. HI was eventually acquired by a French company, Infogrames which later became Atari. Are you following this? Today I'm independent, and now I'm going on my 3rd year. I have mixed feelings. I miss the day to day interaction with other designers. Truly a fine bunch of people. I do however love setting my own hours and working on projects that I want to do.
Tom Vasel: What was it like to work with a licence when creating a game (like Mr. T)?
Larry Harris: License games are big business. We're talking huge numbers. StarWars is a classic example. I have always taken license gaming as an important part of the game design business. I must have designed well over a hundred games. I always try to develop a good game. You must take your core audience into consideration. Their age, the primary sex, the theme, good vs. evil, etc. I even designed a Dr. Laura game based on her radio show and her stated philosophies. I've worked on Trivia Pursuit, Monopoly and I might add - I was the primary force and supporter for getting rid of those Roman numerals in Risk and replacing them with little plastic and metal soldiers. These are three examples of "Brands" but Brands and licensing are all pretty much the same thing. They are well known and appeal to the consumers awareness and comfort with the product. Axis & Allies has slowly but nonetheless surely become a Brand.
Tom Vasel: Thanks for participating in the interview, Mr. Harris! Do you have any final words for our readers?
Larry Harris: ... Rosebud
Tom Vasel
"Real men play board games"
Larry said this about himself…
Work History:
I have been designing games for the past 25 years.
Recently I have been working as an independent game designer. My main focus "will be" developing game concepts for both the board game and computer game industries.
I've had an extensive career working as a designer. Companies I've worked for include: Milton Bradley, Mattel, Coleco, Parker Brothers, Hasbro Games Group, Hasbro Interactive and Infogrames Interactive and finally Atari. Presently running Harris Game Design.
Games:
I have worked on many games over the years. During my first year at Milton Bradley, 1984, I had 13 games of my design featured in the company's catalog. This included the then brand new "Game Masters Series". All these games were of my design. My design credits range from Mr. T board game to Computer and Console games that I'm not yet at liberty to discuss. I personally own several IP's , including the Axis & Allies franchise. My expertise is "mass market" product with strong brand recognition. I love the creative process and always strive to "Wow" the final users of my creation.
Personal Interest:
I play lots of board and computer games with a particular interest in strategy games. Reading, with a particular interest in military history. I have lived extensively in Europe and the Middle East. I speak fluent French. I'm an Army veteran with 5 years service. I am also an ultra-light pilot.
Tom Vasel: Why do you think Axis and Allies enjoyed a much greater success than the other games in the GameMaster series?
Larry Harris: I'm not sure. Perhaps because of the subject - World War II. Perhaps because it dealt with the entire global struggle, but that would not account for the commercial success of Axis & Allies Europe, Pacific and D-Day. I think the secret is in the simplicity of the Axis & Allies game mechanics. Another game of mine, Conquest of the Empire, also has these simple mechanics. It also allows for the social interaction of several players. In both games there is a game that goes on above and beyond the gameboard. Do you know what I mean? Both games allow for smack-talk and role playing. None of these features are unique to Axis & Allies or Conquest of the Empire however. I don't know the answer. Perhaps there's no specific answer. Perhaps it's a combination of elements. It kind of reminds me of a good mix of chemicals that when combined make for a good end product. These games just strike a nerve I guess. The fact that Axis & Allies has been around since the 1980's also helps. It has become a classic in the industry. Once a game becomes a classic people feel comfortable with it and like Monopoly seem to be born knowing how to play it! Conquest of the Empire did not enjoy the same number of years on the store shelves. Some marketing decisions that had nothing to do with sales caused it to stop being published soon after its initial release. Eagle Games has just republished Conquest of the Empire this month. It was presented for the first time in 20 years at this year's Origins. People love this game. It now is on its own road to becoming a "Classic." Did you see what Eagle Games did to this game? It's truly beautiful in all aspects.
Tom Vasel: As I looked over my copy of Conquest of Empires tonight, I noticed two sets of rules - one by you, and the other by Glen Drover. Can you briefly talk about the differences in the games, and which do you prefer?
Larry Harris: In talking about the difference between the two sets of rules let me put it this way. The original set of rules has fewer in-game options (due to limited infantry movement for example) but more room for "above the table" discussion/negotiation, which I love in a game. The new set of rules, influenced by Martin Wallace's Struggle of Empires, has more in-game options (more movement, cards, influence) but somewhat limits the above the table discussion/negotiation (for example the alliance is locked for the campaign season, and you cannot attack an ally).
The two sets of rules make for an interesting dynamic. I don't prefer one set over the other. It very much depends on my mood at the time. The classic set of rules is probably easier in the beginning, but as the game develops the negotiations get more intense and probably longer. The new set of rules has more information to absorb at the beginning, but in the long term will probably play as fast because there is less of a need for the "above the table" discussion.
Tom Vasel: What do you think about articles on the internet that dissect Axis and Allies down to a fine science, such as "you must build such and such on your first turn, and attack here...", etc.?
Larry Harris: Great question… What I really like is how well Axis & Allies stands up to these dissections. I never approach game design as a fine science. The possible exception to that statement is reverence for the game’s math. A&A and indeed most of all my games are firmly based on math. I find that funny because I’m certainly not any kind of mathematician. There’s a circle of life in these game. I think this comes through when you really take an in-depth look at what makes them tick. You control a certain number of territories that provide a certain number of IPC’s which in turn permit you to purchase a certain number of weapons and/or units to defend your territories and with a bit of luck acquire even more territories. No weapon is too good a deal or value in comparison to what you pay for it, and no weapon is not worth what you pay for it. There are some who will argue with me about this, but all in all the math works great. All this represents a very delicate balance of plus’s and minus’s.
As for the “you must build such and such on your first turn” etc… Again A&A has had the good fortune of being able to stand up to this line of thinking. And believe me, I count my blessings in that regard. Over the years there have been a couple of times that I thought that the “game-busting” strategy had been found. Inevitably, someone always came up with an antidote or a counter strategy.
Tom Vasel: So what games can we expect to see from you in the future?
Larry Harris: What games can you expect to see from me in the future… I want to continue what I call the Big Battle Series of Axis & Allies. Axis & Allies D-Day, which just won “Gamers' Choice Award,” is what I consider the first in a series of major World War II battle games. I can’t be very specific, but at the moment I’m working on a major battle that took place in the Pacific. If I have it my way this series would include such epic battles as Stalingrad, The Battle of the Bulge, Market Garden and so.
I have a head full of other games as well. Eagle Games just came out with the re-make of Conquest of the Empire. Have you seen what Glenn Drover did with this game? It’s absolutely beautiful, stunning. Is “breathtaking” a descriptive adjective? I want to work with Eagle Games in the future. Not only to do extension to Conquest but also as an outlet for other ideas I have.
Wizkids is another company that has impressed me. They too do amazing products. Great people and their fearless leader, Jordan Weisman, is a genius. I have some ideas for them as well. I can’t get into specifics. Most of the publishers want to keep future products under wraps until just the right moment. It’s all part of their marketing strategy. I respect that.
I guess the best answer I can give you is… I’m busy designing and I’ve never felt more excited about it.
Tom Vasel: Do you think Eagle Games is the true successor to the Gamemaster games series?
Larry Harris: I see a lot of the Gamemaster series in the Eagle Games line up of product. Yes, Eagle Games is the successor to the Gamemaster series. This company came out of no where and suddenly they were there with games that had plastic pieces and giant game boards. They all had strong historical slants and themes. I tip my hat to Eagle Games – Job well done.
At the same time Wizards of the Coast has picked up the torch and Avalon Hill is alive and well. I do think they are trying to adjust and get in touch with the realities of today’s adventure board gaming. I’m not sure how this will all pan out. Personally I don’t think either company should move towards the “European” type of games. They should be true to their heritage. To their roots.
Tom Vasel: What is your opinion of "European" games? How have they affected the board game market?
Larry Harris: They don’t capture my imagination. I often don’t fine the game play to match the theme. These “European Games” are not my cup of tea, but I don't collect Magic cards either. Don’t get me wrong. I think they are full of depth and very cleaver as far as game mechanics go. I must say that they are almost always beautifully made. The game components are usually wonderful. You can feel the creativity that went into them. I have no favorite.
Tom Vasel: Do you think that there is a perfect mix of American and German games that is waiting to be made?
Larry Harris: If there is ... Alan Moon would have already found it.
Tom Vasel: Prior to designing Axis and Allies, what games and game designers had influenced you the most?
Larry Harris: Well, it certainly was Avalon Hill, and more specifically Gettysburg and Waterloo. I loved the notion that those little cardboard chits represented historical units and that I could control their movements and attacks. I could recreate their story and even change it. I remember rolling a die and experiencing the magic of it all. Running my index finger along a combat and ratio chart. Cross referencing until I got a combat results. Contemplating the impact of the result. Contemplating the human side. The historical implications. These games really made you stop and think. There was so much more there than met the eye. It was a sort of “hands-on-history” lesson . Remember - it was all brand new back then. But even today and everyday, the discovery of "War Games" occurs by some kid somewhere. Aaah, that first time. Models, the plastic kind, were big when I was a kid. Maybe they still are. I don't know. In any case there seemed to be two category of boys. The ones who built plastic car models and the ones who built warships and planes. I was certainly one of those warships and planes kids. Back when I was coming of age, we did not know who the designers of these games were. The fact that it was Avalon Hill was enough. I loved how the games seemed so sophisticated. They were actually bland and very dry. Certainly these were made for adults and here I was, far from being an adult, enjoying them.
I remember spending hours and hours playing with Milton Bradley’s American Heritage series – Battle Cry, Broadsides and Dogfight come to mind. Eventually I redesigned each of these games to my own liking. Those little plastic blue and gray army men of Battle Cry, they absolutely captured my imagination.
What if you took the complexity and the historical value of the Avalon Hill games and mixed them with the great playing pieces of the American Heritage series? Now that would be the type of games I could really get into.
Tom Vasel: Axis and Allies is, without a doubt, one of the most well known games in the world. Love it or hate it, most gamers have played it at one point or another. Do you think you can and will ever design another game that has the sheer popularity of that one?
Larry Harris: That's a big order. Nonetheless, I am sure there are a couple of big ones left in me. I am moving in several directions at present. There are a couple of games that I'm working on presently that look and feel very promising. Conquest of the Empire is one such game, but there are a couple of others that I can't discuss at this point.
Tom Vasel: Your war games are mostly on the "light" side. Do you prefer that to heavier simulations?
Larry Harris: Heavier simulations - to me that's another way of saying: Let's all go to the dentist office. It was the heavy simulation "3rd Reich" that pushed me over the edge and made me go design my own games. I could not dedicate the amount of brain time it required to learn enough about the game to ever enjoy playing it. I think "Light" games are often "Light" because the designer made a little extra effort and introduced some good doses of "Intuitiveness," and figured out that the average player does not really care how much gas is in every jeep and tank in a given Division.
Often what a heavy simulation deals with is simply not necessary in order to have a good enjoyment factor. Things that require paragraphs of explanations can and often are dealt with in the mind of the player. He fills in the blanks with his imagination. He connects the dots and does not need several pages of rules telling him how to do that. I also find that many rules, complex rules, are often created to make a game work rather than to make it fun.
I'm sure there's a place for heavies, probably in Graduate School. I'm sure heavy simulations are appreciated by some. There is a need for them. But as for me, I like to keep it simple stupid.
Tom Vasel: Do you extremely light war games, such as Risk, or do you think they have too much luck?
Larry Harris: Of course you can go too far in the "luck" direction. Some might think Risk is based too much on luck. For sure luck plays a role, actually a big role. But if I have 10 armies and you have 6, I'm probably going to win. In Axis & Allies I'd like to think that you get what you pay for. Three IPC's for an infantry unit that gives you a 1/2/1 and five IPC's for an armor unit that gives you another statistic -3/3/2. You can expect certain results from your dice over the long run. Much like you can expect your Queen in chess to be more powerful than one of your Pawns or even one of your Bishops. Another factor to take into account is what I call the level playing field. Even if an out come is derived from "luck", that's ok with me as long as we are all playing within some identified and equally established parameters. "Luck" is nothing to scorn. When referencing to history as the setting for game, as I often do, I can think of nothing more prevalent in all the worlds great events than "Luck". How about that weather forecast on June 6th, 1944? How about the battle of Midway? Talk about luck! How about a game of Yahtzee, anyone?
Tom Vasel: Do you think that plastic pieces are better than cardboard counters?
Larry Harris: Not always... Playing a game should be an experience. More precisely, you should be experiencing a certain situation or presented certain problems that make you feel like you are actually participating in the theme you are recreating. Look at Monopoly. Do you think the game would be the same without those little green houses and those red hotels? I think they bring so much to the game. Those are your houses, your hotels, and there they are right there on the board. Monopoly money actually becomes valuable after a while. The company that printed the game took the time and expense to make it look and feel that way.
I often want to create a "War Room" look and feel with my strategy games. The right pieces on the map tie it all together. They help generate that desired look and feeling. Can you do this without plastic pieces? Sometimes. Another way of looking at this issue, from a designers point of view, is asking the question - What game components will best enhance this gaming experience? Those are the game components that should be used. Of course cost often becomes the issue. I think a publisher should put the very best game components it can in a game. What those components are depends in a large part on what the game is.
Tom Vasel: What would be your advice to aspiring game designers?
Larry Harris: First I'd get a box of crayons. The big box with the sharpener built in. I'd make 100 perfectly round circles and color each circle a different color. These will be the "oh's" for your tic-tac-toe game that you will play with yourself. Now make the "X's". Again 100 and each a different color. As soon as you have played 100 games, set all these documents on fire and begin again. Do this everyday for 5 to 8 years. Oh yeah, I almost forgot... Write a different set of rules for each of your 100 tic-tac-toe games. Or, you can of course take the less artistic and more physical approach. Find a wall, the harder the better, and continue banging your head against it until your dead or cured from your affliction of wanting to be a game designer.
On the other hand you could start your own game company and design all the games you can afford to make. My point... This is a tough business to be in. Success is far from assured. I do think you need natural talents that can't be taught. You either have them or you don't. If you do have these talents - you know it. You feel it. In that case just design and don't let any thing or person get in your way. Make it happen. Pay attention to the details. Be original. Remember you are creating something that should be intended to entertain. Good luck... you'll need it.
You could always become a computer game designer... anybody can do that.
Tom Vasel: Larry, how did you initially get companies to notice you and your games?
Larry Harris: One day I got up, dragged a comb across my head. Went down stairs and had a cup. Suddenly it occurred to me that I was doing ok as a game designer in Europe and wondered how I would do in my own country. America!
I packed my bags and headed home after having been away for 10 years. What was intended to be a 3 month summer vacation after having just got out of the Army turned into 10 years in Paris. It was time to return to the United States. At this point in my life I also finally knew what I wanted to be when I grew up. I wanted to be a GAME DESIGNER.
I decided to settle in Connecticut. That's were I was from originally. I brought with me many game ideas and was anxious to show them around. I made several trips to New York to visit SPI and Avalon Hill and others. No one was particularly interested in my stuff. I occasionally visit a local game store in Groton, Connecticut. The Citadel. It was owned and operated by Pat Flory. I think he still has a game store in Groton. In any case to make a long story short Pat told me that next Thursday night a game company was coming by to present a game to the store and asked me if I wanted to present any of my games to them. That was how I met Nova. They were riding high back in those days. They had just come out with a wonderful game called Ace of Ace's. I showed them my game 1942. They loved it, and we decided to rename it Axis & Allies. I think Pat Flory came up with the name.
We went to contract. They sold some games. It was not an overwhelming success. Frankly it didn't look too good. A paper map and some really strange shaped die-cut cardboard counters.
Later that year I was approached by a Head-Hunter that told me that Milton Bradley was looking for an experienced and published game designer. Aaah, Corporate America! Medical insurance, retirement plan, steady pay check… I'll take it. I was working there for 2 weeks when my new boss asked me to explain what these hobby games, Avalon Hill type stuff was. I put together a presentation. I included Axis & Allies, Conquest of the Empire and Broadsides and Boarding Parties in the presentation. It turned out that Milton Bradley wanted to try out this new gaming area. They offered to license the 3 games I created. They made me an offer I could not refuse. There was one catch. I had already licensed Axis & Allies to Nova. I called Nova and asked them to join with me and sub license A&A. They of course agreed, and the rest is history.
I not only was getting paid to develop my own games but was also receiving royalties. This was unheard of in the business. I was what was known as an "In House Designer". That's a guy or gal that designs games for a major game company. Today most of these positions are filled by Industrial Designers right out of art school. They do this for a salary but never receive royalties. Well that changed. At the 1984/85 Toy Fair in New York I had an entire huge room to myself where I presented the original Gamemaster Series for the first time. This was truly a Cinderella story.
Tom Vasel: How long did this last? What caused you to eventually leave Milton Bradley?
Larry Harris: That is a great question. I was there just a couple of years. I absolutely loved the place and the people I was working with. My first year there I managed to place 13 game designs in the 1985 catalog! This ranged from the Gamemaster series to Her Self the Elf and Mr. T.
I was in love with the toy and game industry, and I wanted to feel it. I wanted to participate in it in a big way. I did not want to get stuck and locked-in to one job. Mattel offered me a job as a designer. I could remain on the East coast and not have to move to LA. The money was amazing, and the people I would work for were great people I already knew. I jumped ship. Another factor came into play as well, Hasbro had just bought Milton Bradley, and things were going to be changing. I was sure it was time to move on. WHAT WAS I THINKING. I learned a lot at Mattel. I managed the game design effort and reported to a Vice President, but I missed Milton Bradley terribly.
Nonetheless I had to move on. I probably should have stayed at MB for a few more years, but like I said, or tried to say. I wanted it all and I wanted to suck in as much of the industry as I could.
Over the years I have worked for a long list of major game companies. Coleco - do you remember them? Parker Brothers was where I worked the longest, 12 years. That was another great company. Eventually it all came full circle. Hasbro acquired Parker Brothers! Milton Bradley's R&D moved to the Parker Brothers building just North of Boston, and once again I was working with Milton Bradley as part of the Hasbro Games Group.
Eventually I opted once more to move on. This time it was to Hasbro's computer game arm. Hasbro Interactive. HI was eventually acquired by a French company, Infogrames which later became Atari. Are you following this? Today I'm independent, and now I'm going on my 3rd year. I have mixed feelings. I miss the day to day interaction with other designers. Truly a fine bunch of people. I do however love setting my own hours and working on projects that I want to do.
Tom Vasel: What was it like to work with a licence when creating a game (like Mr. T)?
Larry Harris: License games are big business. We're talking huge numbers. StarWars is a classic example. I have always taken license gaming as an important part of the game design business. I must have designed well over a hundred games. I always try to develop a good game. You must take your core audience into consideration. Their age, the primary sex, the theme, good vs. evil, etc. I even designed a Dr. Laura game based on her radio show and her stated philosophies. I've worked on Trivia Pursuit, Monopoly and I might add - I was the primary force and supporter for getting rid of those Roman numerals in Risk and replacing them with little plastic and metal soldiers. These are three examples of "Brands" but Brands and licensing are all pretty much the same thing. They are well known and appeal to the consumers awareness and comfort with the product. Axis & Allies has slowly but nonetheless surely become a Brand.
Tom Vasel: Thanks for participating in the interview, Mr. Harris! Do you have any final words for our readers?
Larry Harris: ... Rosebud
Tom Vasel
"Real men play board games"
