Andrey Podshibyakin “Time of Games!”

It seems that the book Blood, Sweat, and Pixels was quite successful in demonstrating that the public is very interested in stories about games and their creators. Suddenly, previously published books started being reprinted, and new ones began to appear quickly. One of these is a book by Andrey Podshibyakin, who started his career in the gaming industry as a journalist for the “GAME.EXE” magazine. Unlike Jason Schreier’s aforementioned book, Andrey focused only on Russian games and companies, including our very own “World of Tanks.”

Like Schreier, Andrey Podshibyakin selected a few games around which he built his book, giving it the subtitle “The Russian Gaming Industry in Faces and Dreams: from Parkan to World of Tanks.” The list includes:

• “Parkan,” 1997
• “Vangers,” 1998
• “Hard Truck,” 1998 (and sequels from 2001 and 2009)
• “Rage of Mages: The Seal of Mystery,” 1998
• “Sea Dogs: The Curse of the Distant Seas” (actually, it’s called “The Curse of Far Seas”), 2001 (and the sequel from 2003)
• “IL-2 Sturmovik,” 2001
• “Silent Storm,” 2003
• “Perimeter,” 2004
• “S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Shadow of Chernobyl,” 2007, and “S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Clear Sky,” 2008
• “Cut the Rope,” 2010
• “World of Tanks,” 2010
• There are also several unreleased titles, such as “Vseslav the Sorcerer” and “The Adventures of Captain Blood,” among others.

Even this list shows that just text may not be enough for such a book. While Schreier covered globally recognized games, here are titles that many modern readers may not know, and those who do may not remember the details. Hence, illustrations would be very helpful. Memory is unreliable: you may recall that something was fantastic, but you still want to look back and compare those breakthrough graphics with today’s standards.

The author intentionally structured all the games chronologically, attempting to show how the gaming industry emerged in the post-Soviet space, how it developed, and how Russians came to be perceived as strong players in a field where we initially lagged behind by a couple of decades.

At first, the book indeed reads like a dive into one’s own childhood and history. We grew up in the same realities, played the same games. But unfortunately, the further I read, the less I liked the book.

Even in the first few chapters, there was a sense that the information was verbose but rather superficial. In addition to his reflections, the author frequently inserts quotes from old articles (specifically from the magazines where he worked — GAME.EXE and Afisha), and the overall narrative doesn’t always come together. In some cases, the chapters even feel like they’re cut off mid-thought, for example, the stories about Hard Truck or Vseslav the Sorcerer. The latter left an impression of “we built and built and… well, that’s it.”

Moreover, the stories are based either on the author’s feelings or interviews with a single representative of the team (rarely more). And of course, such a presentation, especially about events from years past, inevitably feels very subjective. It also seems that some of the interviews were conducted quite a while ago.

When I got to the chapter about World of Tanks, my concerns about the superficial nature of the book were confirmed. Yes, I didn’t participate in the very earliest development stages of the game. My department was the last to get involved, as we were finalizing the previous project while most of the team had already shifted focus to Tanks. But I was still inside the company and know the story from within.

However, Andrey builds the entire chapter on one interview. In some cases, the facts presented are slightly misrepresented. And overall, the story of how this game came to be could have been told with much more depth and interest. After all, it became a cultural phenomenon.

When you catch such inaccuracies about things you know well, you begin to view the rest of the book more critically. Moreover, if the intention was to show the industry’s development, it seems odd to limit the selection to these particular games and omit others that were even more successful.

Where, for example, are Space Rangers? Where are Metro 2033 and Warface? Why do some studios/people get multiple chapters, while other significant figures are not mentioned at all? Two whole chapters are dedicated to KranK, though in my view, his games are closer to what’s known as art-house cinema (without diminishing their merit).

One major issue with the text is a sense of self-importance. There’s a constant mention of the elitism of GAME.EXE (and thus, a condescending attitude toward everyone else). Then there’s a game of finding connections where none exist (Podshibyakin refers to these connections and references as “rhymes”). And he finds them. Well, no surprise that there were few companies in the industry back then, and naturally, they crossed paths from time to time. If you dig back another 10-20 years, there would be even more of these “rhymes.”

Again, Schreier’s book had at least some throughline: making games is hard. In this book, there’s no visible unifying idea. If you analyze all the chapters after reading, it feels like the author had an idea and stuck to it (hence the superficiality and one-sidedness). But as soon as the idea was lost or became uninteresting, the chapter just ended.

Now, this perspective is valid. And it was pleasant to reminisce about the industry’s origins. Moreover, it was fascinating that Andrey talked about games that never saw the light of day. Unreleased games always outnumber those that do get released. But the ones he described were widely known.

Overall, though, I expected more from the book.

My rating: 3/5