Reddit posted a link to this ‘interview’
I was disappointed to find it’s not an interview at all, and isn’t really worthwhile. I did find this quote, though, which was both telling and startling to me:
The Core set features many of the most powerful and IMO properly (non-conservatively costed) cards to date. Apparently Lukas does not agree, claiming ANR early design was conservative in both power-level and costing. He then goes on to say that he would prefer cards sit in a binder forever than be played. We already have ubiquitous cards; they were given to us in the Core set. No serious Netrunners are complaining about Desperado, or Parasite, TME or Sure Gamble. We play these cards because they improve the experience of the game. I think Lukas and the design team need to really reevaluate their entire philosophy of Netrunner. We need every pack to be designed like the Core set; there is no reason why every Cycle can’t introduce more ubiquitous options. I, for one, would much rather see more cards we can play than cards we cannot, and that doesn’t seem to mesh with Lukas’s quote here and the card designs we are being given.
What do others think of this quote? It is totally contrary to my own beliefs about ANR design in its entirety, from ‘early’ to current. Perhaps by ‘early’ Lukas means the first couple Cycles, which would make more sense. Even so, the apparent preference for binder fodder over powerful/usable cards from a design perspective is baffling to me.
His binder comment may also be him saying that the ANR design would rather err on the side of under-powered than overpowered, which I think is a defeatist mentality. I don’t think it is impossible to reasonably balance Netrunner.