Oh please. As if the interviewer's next question wouldn't be "make it faster/more efficient" anyway. The interviewer is the problem here because he wants to build a chess game in an extremely stupid way using OOP for no other reason than to use OOP. I'd say most applications of OOP fail in similar ways in real life, creating monsters of complexity where simplicity could have existed. The author should consider himself lucky: this sounds like an extremely shitty company and the interview has shown him that. It probably wouldn't even be worth it for him to complete the interview at this point. No one wants to work for idiots.