New band from Sweden - the Theory is Sound

http://www.myspace.com/ttisband

Check out this new band, the Theory is Sound. they have a very mature heavy sound which makes me think they've been around for years instead of having just put together their first demo songs. Take a listen, I'm sure you'll be impressed.

Please don't be baffled...

For the casual visitor to the blog it may seem that I've suddenly gone mental. Last year I started posting my old Developing Thoughts articles on here because the original site no longer had them available. Then I became lazy after the tenth and it's been nearly a year since that one went up. So I decided to blast them all up in one fell swoop and label the first ten so that you can view them all from one convenient place. Presuming, of course, that you would wish to do so.

Developing Thoughts 24

Interaction Density

I came up with the term “Interaction Density” when I was part of a long forum discussion on the way there are no adventures targeted at 8-13 year old boys. Why did the likes of “Day of the Tentacle” and “Monkey Island” appeal to this age group when they came out, yet today’s adventure games fail to do so?

Some of the answer lies in the fact that adventure games no longer have that element of fun about them that they once did. Where are the talking skulls, the spitting contests, the tentacles trying to take over the world? Where is the grandiose sense of adventure written big, with jokes and dialogue to match? Some people are of the opinion that the answer lies in recreating the style of the old games and everyone will be happy, but that fails to take into account the changing nature of the game market.

There is another aspect to the problem that has only come about in recent years since the CD became commonplace, the lack of high Interaction Density.

Back when games for the PC and the Amiga came on floppy discs, space was short, so every location was made to earn its keep. On each colourful screen existed a veritable plethora of fun characters to interact with, objects to pick up and hotspots to examine, along with the regular puzzle-solving gameplay. In other words, there was always lots for the player to do in each location – the high Interaction Density ensure that the player shouldn’t become bored.

This thread over at the Adventure Gamers Forums caused me to think about why today's adventure games might not be attractive to 8-13 year olds (boys, mainly). Aside from the fact that very few of them have the pure fun element that older games like Monkey Island or Day of the Tentacle, most of today's adventures have a low Interaction Density.

Because older games had to make the most of limited floppy disc space, particularly on the Amiga, each location in an adventure was made to work hard for its keep. Each screen was filled with wonderful characters, objects to collect or interact with and hotspots to examine. Now, with the ability to cram ten times (or more) the number of locations onto a CD or DVD, even at very high resolution, the number of interactable items on each screen/location has reduced for the same amount of gameplay. The Interaction Density has decreased drastically, to the point in some places where there are strings of locations through which all the player character does is walk.

Game players of all ages don't simply want to wander around, particularly young kids with notoriously short attention spans, so when there is little to interact with, the natural conclusion to draw is that adventures are boring and not worth bothering with. Action games, in comparison, offer an almost constantly high Interaction Density and are always going to be a better draw to gamers who want to be always "doing stuff" in the games they play.

Clearly, the time has come to address this balance by thinking more creatively about the layout of adventures so that they offer the same level of Interaction Density they used to.

© Steve Ince, 2005

Developing Thoughts 23

Back-Story

No, this isn’t the story of how I’m in constant pain with my bad back. But now that I’ve brought it up, I wonder how much sympathy I can garner from mentioning the stabbing pains that run up and (That’s enough, Ince. Get on with the column, you pathetic wimp – Ed.)
Ahem.

Back-story falls into the same category as character profiles – you can write and design your game without it, but it will be so much richer if you’ve taken the time to develop it well.

The back-story should cover anything and everything that leads up to the events of the story covered in the game. Because the game world itself regularly contributes to the experience the player enjoys, details of how the game world came to be should be a major part of the detail.

You may have already chosen to include each character’s personal back-story into the character profiles, but this shouldn’t stop you looking at how the characters fit into the overall back-story. As already mentioned last week, the character profiles enable you and the team to get a handle on the characters themselves – what makes them tick. The back-story enables you to get a handle on the game as a whole, the story that unfolds and the world in which it all takes place.

Many elements of the back-story have a direct bearing on the game’s story and gameplay. Sometimes this is revealed as important clues or information the player discovers as he progresses through the game; sometimes it’s just background that adds to the flavour and richness, but has no direct influence on the story.

The development team should always know more about the world than they ever expect to put into the game. Some material may exist just to help the writer approach a particular scene in a way that makes it more believable.

One such instance is a scene in Broken Sword: The Sleeping Dragon. Petra is holding a gun on Nico and suggests that they have met previously, but doesn’t enlighten Nico as to when that was. Here is a detail that, though created, was not fully revealed. Not only does it refer to a time and place outside of the current game world, it also adds a mystery as the player puzzles over this. If there are further sequels, more detail could be revealed, but for the follower of the series, thoughts about where it could have happened in the previous games (if at all) abound.

In a similar manner to working up character profiles, develop your back-story with a view to creating detail and answering questions about everything that has a possible bearing. What is the history of the weird race of cats? How did the zombies arrive on the strange moon? What is the story behind the gold artefact found at the bottom of a Scottish loch?

Unlike character profiles, it is not possible to break down the back-story into a series of headings to be filled in. Because the nature of your story is likely to be unique, the events that lead up to it will also be unique. Each game will have its own back-story, its own way of pulling everything together to make the story much more rewarding.

Don’t be afraid to be quite open in your inventiveness – providing you maintain a consistency with your world. I don’t have a bad back, but it would have made the story of the way I sit here and type these words so much more interesting if that were the case. The thought of a writer suffering for his art somehow seems more in keeping with a stereotype image.

However, I’ll leave it for you to decide if that should belong in my character profile or my life’s back-story.

© Steve Ince, 2004

Developing Thoughts 22

Character Profiles

Part of my current job involves creating the character profiles for my client’s project. Now, I can’t go into the specific details of what I’m doing (for obvious reasons), but I thought I would reflect on how important it is to do this work. Although I’ve already discussed characters, in an earlier column, this edition deals with the profiles themselves.

Of course, you may think that if you’re the only one working on your project, character profiles are not important – you know what your characters will do or how they’ll behave in a given situation. However, while that may be true for a few main characters, it’s unlikely to be the case for all of the characters you’ll likely need in a story-based game. It’s equally important to develop proper character profiles if you are a team of one, or part of a team of fifty.

Not only do character profiles act as a means of recording your thoughts on your main characters – how they behave and react – they also serve a fuller purpose of helping you work through the details of your supporting characters. The process of developing the profiles allows you flesh out the characters and make them much more rounded.

You may wonder why this is important for supporting characters, but if you want the character designer and modeller to transfer your ideas into polygon flesh, so to speak, then the more they have to go on the better the character will match the mental picture you had of each one. Likewise, if the animators have an understanding of what makes your characters tick, then they’re much more likely to animate them in a rich and varied manner. As important as this side of things is, the real value of the profiles is how they can help you.

Months may pass from writing the story for your project and writing the scenes that take place between the characters. While you may remember the broad sweep with crystal clarity, it’s likely that all of the subtlety you were thinking of at the time has been lost because you’ve spent the intervening time working on other aspects of the project, or even on another project altogether.

I’m not talking about the subtlety of the story, but of the characters. If Katie Eckersley has suffered from asthma since being six years old, how will that affect her outlook on life? Has she given into it and developed a hatred for all sports? Or has she seen it as a challenge and is now a champion swimmer? And how did that affect the relationship she had with her mother, who smothered her in attempting to protect Katie from harm?

Characters are so much more than one defining trait, though, and the profiles you develop should reflect this. Basic information like gender, age and build are always useful to include, simply because they start the ball rolling and get you into the other details more readily. What you include in your list will be down to your particular tastes and the needs of the game you’re developing for, but it’s better to have too much information than not enough. Some suggestions for included traits or information could be:

• The purpose of the character in the game.
• How they progress through the game.
• Speech oddities, accents and mannerisms.
• Occupation.
• Personal history or background.
• What they like to do in their spare time.
• Any special talents or abilities.
• Any handicaps or problems.
• How they dress.

This is a straightforward list, but it can be adapted or added to, particularly if your characters inhabit a fantastical universe, or it’s important to build a highly subtle portrait of each character. However, there are things that it would be silly to include, like favourite colour – when was the last time you heard of the way two people interact with one-another being affected by their favourite colour?

One of the real beauties of working through your list of traits and information, filling out details for each character, is that it can be such fun. Not only do you get to make up small stories about each character’s life and the type of person they are, it can give you new insights into the main story and how it can be subtly enriched by this wealth of detail you have just developed.

The characters come to life and the story and game become so much more immersive.

© Steve Ince, 2004

Developing Thoughts 21

Obstacles of Desire

One of my favourite obstacles in a game was in Beneath a Steel Sky. Though I worked on this game, I didn’t contribute to the gameplay design; so I think it’s okay for me to feel this way. One of the reasons I enjoyed my eleven years with Revolution was that I had such respect for the people I worked with.

The obstacle in question involved getting into a security building with the use of a grappling hook and cable. The route to getting these objects had a convoluted series of steps that involved finding a spanner, fitting the robot, Joey, with a welder shell, trading objects with others, distracting people, getting Joey to melt through a loose cable and then have him cut the anchor off a statue in order that you could use it as the hook. Mixed into this were other minor obstacles and much humour as you explored the world and put up with the sarcastic comments of a less than enthusiastic sidekick.

What worked best for me was the way that I never felt that I was simply solving a small puzzle and then moving onto the next one – the gameplay seemed more continuous and free flowing than that. Being able to wander around the world with relative freedom also helped give the impression that I was in control of what was going on.

Another obstacle I particularly admire is in Half-Life, where you must kill the monster with the test rocket engine. Of course, you must get past the monster a few times in order to get the fuel and power flowing to the engine and console, working out how to distract it temporarily as you work through the tasks involved. The elegance of the obstacle is that not only was it clear what your objective was, but it acted as a secondary obstacle to completing the other tasks. Then, when you completed the tasks and fired off the rocket engine, it was such a satisfying thing to do, rewarding you well for overcoming the obstacle.

One of the things that strikes me, is that a successful obstacle is one that doesn’t give the impression that it’s insurmountable, even if you’re struggling to complete the tasks needed to beat it. If the objective is clear and the tools are to hand (though they may be difficult to obtain), then all that’s left is for the player to put the parts together. Of course, simply put like that, it may seem as though making the obstacles easy is the key, but that’s not the case. It’s not about ease, but clarity – difficulty should arise from the way the route to beating the obstacle tests the skills of the player, not by making the steps along the route obscure or illogical.

There have been games in the past, where playing them has felt, at times, as if it’s a battle with the designer. Searching for the important object was reduced to a mind-numbing pixel hunt, or leaping across the chasm could only be achieved by a professional gaming ninja with skills enough to press twenty buttons or keys at the same time.

When the designer of an obstacle begins to think, “There’s no way the player will beat this one!” then it’s time that the designer should be re-thinking his approach to obstacle design. Thankfully, few games have this flaw, today, but thinking carefully about obstacles will only improve the whole gaming experience for all of us.

© Steve Ince, 2004

Developing Thoughts 20

Puzzling Through the Obstacles

One of the criticisms levelled at Adventure Games these days is that they can feel a little old fashioned. I’m increasingly of the opinion that this is because they contain these things we refer to as “puzzles”. This term can then create the wrong idea in people’s heads as to what sort of game adventures are. Of course, there are adventures that probably fit this perception very well, but more and more adventures are developing a kind of gameplay that makes it difficult to think of the player as solving puzzles.

The word puzzle, to me, suggests gameplay that involves pulling levers in the right combination or fiddling around with sliders. While there isn’t necessarily anything wrong with this type of gameplay, it does have a “static” kind of feel to it, particularly at a time when the majority of gamers want dynamic games. Some of the other aspects of adventure games – collecting clues, using inventory objects, developing story and so forth – are already being included in other genres, so it seems that adventures could find a broader player base if they concentrated on just these aspects. And stopped using the word, puzzle.

I believe that a much better term is “obstacle”. This has a much wider relevance and can be applied to almost any genre of game. For my purposes, an obstacle is anything that the player must overcome in order to progress in the game. A puzzle may be an obstacle, but obstacles aren’t restricted to puzzles. An obstacle is also the end of level boss in a platform game, or winning the gold trophy in a race game in order to unlock the special car.

One of the beauties of thinking in terms of obstacles is that you can take a much wider approach to your thinking than when concentrating on puzzles. In many respects, the antagonist, working his way through the plot of the game in opposition to the hero, is a large obstacle that lasts the length and breadth of the game and the other obstacles simply feed into that. At least they can if they are designed with an eye on how they fit with the overall story, design and the style of gameplay.

Obstacles can overlap and interweave with one another, in the same way that subplots do in a good film or novel. It could be that the player has a number of different obstacles to overcome at any one time and that they could be overcome in any order. Alternatively, in order to overcome one obstacle, another has to be beat to get the device, clue or information needed to address the first.

Sometimes an obstacle needs a multiple-stage approach to beating it, with some of those stages opening up new obstacles. Suppose, for instance, your character needs to get into the courtyard, but there’s a wall blocking the way. The character can’t just climb over, as it’s too high, so he brings across the nearby dustbin to stand on. Only then, he finds that broken glass has been cemented into the top of the wall and he’ll cut himself to ribbons if he tries to climb over. Therefore, he needs to find something like a heavy rug to drape over the wall. The only one he can find nearby is being used by a tramp who won’t give it to him unless he gets a bottle of whiskey in return...

Of course, if it were a GTA type of game, the player would simply blow the tramp away and take the rug. However, if you had the anti-gravity pulse boots I talked about a few weeks ago, the wall would only be a minor obstacle, as the player character would simply jump over the wall without worrying.

What the above shows is that while obstacles can be built upon to provide increasing gameplay, the same obstacles in different styles of game will require different solutions and approaches by the player.

The trick is in making the obstacles challenging without giving the player the feeling that they are going nowhere.

© Steve Ince, 2004

Developing Thoughts 19

Shall we interface?

Have you ever picked up your joypad or approached your keyboard and found that you struggled to play the game that’s in the machine because the interface felt wrong? Have you ever given up on a game simply because you were fighting the interface more than playing the game? When the interface creates these feelings in the player, it acts as a barrier to enjoyment of the game, instead of a means by which players can immerse themselves into the game world with ease.

The development of a set of interface mechanics can be a major concern. If you don’t get it right, the whole perception of the playability of your game will be judged by how the interface affects the player’s enjoyment. It’s likely that most projects go through a period where the interface doesn’t feel right or needs improvement – the trick is to discover the problems before the game is released.

It is at this point that some of you may be wondering about the interface problems in Broken Sword – The Sleeping Dragon. For many people, the keyboard interface on this game was a major barrier to their enjoyment and is actually a powerful lesson in the dangers of taking things for granted.

Revolution Software was clear from the outset that the game should move away from the point-and-click interface that was the trademark of the adventure. Many reviews of other adventures or articles about the adventure genre often talked about the point-and-click interface in a derogatory manner. It was felt that such a PC-specific interface was holding the genre back from moving to a wider range of gaming platforms. With this in mind, the development of The Sleeping Dragon was geared towards a lead on the PS2 and Xbox consoles with an interface that matched the joypads that the two machines used.

The joypad-based interfaces worked very well and suited perfectly the aims of broadening the genre. However, this success blinded us to the problem of the PC interface and here was where we took for granted that on the keyboard it would just work. Moving the player character around the game environments in a screen-relative control mode simply isn’t as easy on a keyboard as it is with a joypad.

Perhaps it’s the nature of the keys themselves; perhaps it’s something about the difference between using fingers instead of thumbs. Whatever the reason behind the difficulty, it should have been seen earlier so that something could have been done about it. Giving an additional option to switch to character-relative control may have been all that was needed, but it was something we missed and it’s certainly a lesson I have learned. Unfortunately, a lesson learned the hard way.

Of course, it could be that the worry over the point-and-click interface led to a slight over-reaction, particularly when you consider that other games use this type of interface. PC based RPGs regularly use a point-and-click interface with no worry about whether it’s outmoded. Even Doom 3 uses a variation for when the player wishes to interact with objects he comes across in the game world.

When looking at the interface for your game, be aware of what other games are doing and learn from approaches that work well. You can also learn from interfaces that make mistakes, by ensuring that you don’t make those same mistakes.

The interface should be the player’s means of connecting with a great game, not a barrier to having fun.

© Steve Ince, 2004

Developing Thoughts 18

Level 17 Made Me Cry

This may seem like I’m being a little slow on the uptake, but I wanted to finish off my two-part piece on mechanics design before writing this. Besides, it’s always best to ruminate on these things for a little while before launching into commentary. Reacting too swiftly to news, people’s statements and press releases can give results that are coloured by an initial emotional reaction instead of reasoned thought.

Some of the things I’ve read about Spielberg’s and Zemeckis’s recent comments fall into the category of knee-jerk defensive reaction. To summarise, they both feel that while games are developing their story telling well, there is still some way to go before they will be on a par with films. I must say that I agree with this view and it’s difficult to see why anyone would disagree. There are some fabulous things being done in games and we should be proud of how far the industry has developed in a relatively short time, but at the same time, we need to be realistic about where we are in the larger scheme of things.

Having a go at Spielberg seems a little misguided to me. Here is a man with vision, who has created a large number of excellent, successful films; yet people have jumped on his comments as if he doesn't know what he's talking about. While he may not know everything about the games industry, we should be listening to what this man says from the viewpoint of someone on the outside looking in. We should consider how we might use his experience and vision to move game development forward.

Specific attention has been aimed at Spielberg’s quote, "I think the real indicator will be when somebody confesses that they cried at level 17." Many seem to think that it’s an indication that he’s out of touch with games because no one refers to levels in games any more. Come on, just because we may refer to them as chapters or missions, to all intents and purposes they are still levels, particularly in the way that many games implement them.

To ridicule Spielberg’s statement only shows how little is known about the larger issues; about how story works on many levels. Most reactions I’ve read use the same example to refute his claim – the death of Aeris in Final Fantasy VII. If we have only the one example to turn to, it actually shows how right Spielberg is, particularly when you take into account that it’s the death of a main character – an extreme plot development in any situation. What about crying because the main character’s just been told he has cancer? Or with relief that her kidnapped son is alive and well? Or with joy because the boy meets girl subplot has resulted in a meaningful relationship? This is the real significance behind Spielberg’s statement.

From the perspective of people looking from outside the industry, games have clearly yet to move us in the way that films do. One highly emotional scene from a single game that has forty hours of gameplay doesn’t even come close and shows how far we have yet to go.

Because Spielberg has said something that make games look inferior to movies, some people have simply become defensive. Instead, we should be using this as a springboard to making games reach the heights and tell the stories that not only equal those told in films, but also surpass them. There is an amazing wealth of talent in the industry that can help achieve this, but the key is being realistic about where we are now.

© Steve Ince, 2004

Developing Thoughts 17

Gameplay Mechanics part 2

So, it’s a week later and we’ve called the design team together to discuss the results of the brainstorming session. We’ve all typed up our thoughts or scribbled notes in the margins of the brainstorming list. The project is in the early stages, so we’re all really excited about it. We don’t care if it’s going to be a long session because we’re going to have some fun.

Of course, design is a serious business and should always be approached with a professional manner, but if the development of ideas isn’t interlaced with a liberal dose of fun, how will the fun get through to the final game?

Working through a number of ideas, with varying degrees of success, we get to the one that I proposed, the rocket boots. A couple of people express concern that it may be a bit of a cliché, so I suggest that we have a mini-brainstorm and think about possible ways of developing the idea further. If we don’t think it is going anywhere after ten minutes we should put it to one side and move on.

We start with possible variations on the rocket boot idea and we get a few suggestions: jet boots, spring boots and anti-gravity boots. That last idea we think might have legs (ho, ho) so we concentrate on this for a time.

Worried that having the anti-gravity boots on all the time may prove to be a gameplay problem, we look at how we could limit their functionality and make that limit become part of the gameplay. Because many gameplay mechanics are developments of old ideas or simply because players expect sophistication, it’s always better to refine the ideas into something more than the bare essentials.

With this in mind, someone suggests that the boots should be anti-gravity pulse boots. A short burst of anti-gravity would shoot the player character into the air, but they would then be subject to the pull of gravity. It would be down to the player to work out how to use that sudden, huge leap to their advantage. This is a good development, but there is now a concern that the player will simply keep jumping their character continually.

The next suggestion involves a modification so that the boots take thirty seconds to recharge and the battery packs for them only have ten charges. Finding the battery packs for the boots becomes an additional layer of gameplay. Of course, at this stage, any numbers discussed are simply pulled out of the air and will require full game testing and tweaking before a proper gameplay balance is found.

The design session would normally continue looking at the other brainstorming ideas, but for the moment, let’s concentrate on the anti-gravity pulse boots. Although the mechanic is a feasible one, we need to be sure that it fits with the overall concept of the game. If it’s a Victorian mystery adventure, then the idea of the boots would never have been developed in the first place, so the fact that we entertained the idea to the degree we did implies that the basic concept fits with the game premise.

The next stage in the development of any mechanic is to assess the impact it will have on the overall gameplay, the level designs and building and the other mechanics like shooting weapons. Then there are the specific details that have to be considered – the application of physics during flight, the damage to the player for missing the overhead walkway, etc. While looking at these aspects, the design team must be its own devil’s advocate, because if any issues are not discovered and ironed out at this stage, then they are bound to surface later when they will be much more costly to remedy.

Once the details of the mechanic have been worked through to everyone’s satisfaction, the task of documenting it must be undertaken. Never underestimate the value of documentation. Without clearly written documents you have no record of the details of the mechanic. Artists will be unclear what they have to do. Programmers may take months before they are able to work on this mechanic and you’re bound to have forgotten some detail in the interim, so get it down while the idea is still fresh still excites you.

After going through this process, you may think you’ve done well by completely designing a cool mechanic. Fine – pat yourself on the back. But make sure you have plenty of energy for the other 99% of the game that still has to be designed...

© Steve Ince, 2004

Developing Thoughts 16

Gameplay Mechanics

About eight years ago, I was sent a game design handwritten on two sheets of A4 paper with one very small map drawn in pencil. Most of the writing described a story, rather than gameplay, but it was clear that the guy who sent it thought that we’d just take it and implement a game from this. I think it’s fair to say that nowadays the general gaming public have a bit more idea of what goes into making a game than they did those few short years ago, though it’s always useful to look into why we do the things we do.

One of the hardest parts about game design is turning all the cool ideas into realistic and consistent game mechanics and documenting them in such a way that the coding and implementation will happen without any misunderstandings. This isn’t about designing cool levels; this is about developing the basic building blocks with which to design those levels.

Very often, the basic premise for a game is there from the very beginning. The team knows that they want to create an FPS/RPG/RTS/Platformer/Adventure/etc. and they have to build from there. What gameplay mechanics are they going to create that gives their game an edge in today’s marketplace? Clearly a team-wide brainstorming session is called for, where anyone can throw ideas onto the table.

A good brainstorming session should give the team more ideas than they could ever hope to incorporate into a single game. It should never be about analysing those ideas – that comes later – but should be a way of getting everything recorded. If it’s run with the principle of there being no stupid ideas, it will encourage everyone to think outside of the box. Sometimes the “stupid” ideas are the best ones for making everyone feel at ease and may even inspire great ideas in a tangential way.

For the purpose of this column, I’m going to work through an idea that I’ve just brainstormed with myself (don’t worry, it’s perfectly safe if I wash my hands afterwards). Thinking about a way to add something into the mix, I came up with the idea of Rocket Boots. In a normal brainstorming session there would be a few humorous comments, no doubt, so just imagine that someone somewhere has made a witty remark about Elton John’s “Rocket Man”. However, along with everything else generated from the session, it goes down on the list of possible ideas.

The thing about ideas is that they so often need to mature and develop, becoming full-bodied as they work away in the subconscious of the individual team members’ minds. The list of ideas should be written up and distributed, immediately following the brainstorming session, but the design meeting to develop those ideas should be left for at least a couple of days. If possible, so that everyone has had the time to think about them, allow a week to pass by before calling the meeting.

Therefore, with that in mind, if you all have a think about Rocket Boots over the next week, when I resume this topic next time I’ll look at how the idea could be developed into a possible gameplay mechanic.

© Steve Ince, 2004

Developing Thoughts 15

Motivation and Conflict

Like many other aspects of game development, motivation is two-pronged. Not only do you need to consider the motivation of what drives the player character through the game’s story, you also need to consider how to keep the player motivated to continue playing the game.

All games, whether they have a story or not, should ensure that the player is sufficiently motivated to continue playing on a moment-to-moment basis. This is part of the fundamentals of good gameplay and is not what I want to discuss this time around. I want to concentrate on the player character’s motivation and the conflicts that stand in the way. For only with conflict can we get something that approaches true drama.

Motivation comes from a combination of things; the personality of the character, his connection to what’s at stake and his ability to discern a clear direction that will take him towards his goals. If he doesn’t care enough or believe that he can do what needs to be done, then his motivation to even try is going to be severely lacking.

The developing story drives the motivation of the player character. If the broad gameplay goals tie in with the story goals, then the blending of the two will provide additional impetus to the player. If there is a strong story reason to go to the abandoned school, and not just because it’s a cool location, then you believe the character’s motivation for going there much more.

Because there are other characters in the game, you also need to take into account their motivation, particularly the antagonist. Without good motivation, the player will begin to question why the bad guy is doing what he’s doing. It also needs to be made clear that the antagonist is getting on with his plans off screen or it will feel like he’s just sitting around waiting for the player to turn up at the end of the next level.

Drama is created when the expectations of two characters, driven by their individual motivation, comes into conflict. This could be something as simple as one character trying to get through a doorway and another character preventing them. More often than not, the conflict will be more complicated or less clearly definable. Sometimes conflict can be a mixture of three or more characters and it may not always be clear who is conflicting with who – sides may shift and change through the course of an exchange that in turn leads to more conflict.

Conflict may appear to be an odd way of providing motivation for the characters, but if they were the type of characters that backed away from conflict and adversity, would they be the type of characters you’d want in a game? Certainly, the player character should be sufficiently motivated that he will continue, even when faced with personal danger, the threat of global annihilation, and sarcastic ridicule.

If the player character is taking a path that brings him into conflict with the plans of the antagonist, then he’s clearly on the right lines. If that isn’t enough motivation in itself, then we’ll throw in some poisonous spiders and snakes for good measure.

© Steve Ince, 2004

Developing Thoughts 14

Dialogue? What dialogue?
Part Three

That this subject had stretched itself to a third column shows the importance I feel that dialogue plays in story and character driven games. As I touched on briefly last time, if vital game information is revealed through dialogue, conversations should not be separated out from the overall gameplay. This means that because dialogue becomes an important part of the gameplay, the player should therefore have at least a modicum of control during conversations.

The player can become frustrated when it seems they are simply a passenger during long periods of exposition. However, if the player gets the opportunity to work for that exposition, the rewarding nature of the interaction increases the empathy with the player character and the involvement in the developing story.

To obtain the best possible fit, dialogue must become part of the overall game design process or the aims of the dialogue and the gameplay may be at odds with each other. In other words, a structure should be developed for the way that the dialogue scenes are triggered so that it matches the structure of the other aspects of developing gameplay.

This isn’t to say that actual lines of dialogue need to be written as part of the design process, simply that the scenes should be identified and what information is going to be discussed and passed on.

In many respects, it’s much better not to write any dialogue at first as it can have an effect on the speed of implementation and testing. Having just the bare bones of the scenes with variables being set, means exactly the same thing to the progress of the game, providing that the people implementing the game have a clear idea of what is happening in each scene. The dialogue can be written and added in at a later point and may benefit from the writer being able to see the game in progress and match the feel of the dialogue to what’s on screen.

Something that always strikes me as poor dialogue structure, when I see it in a game, is when avenues of dialogue repeat unnecessarily. Unless the dialogue structure is specifically designed so that the discussion of a subject can expand in detail – introducing new lines for example – the chance to talk about that subject again should not be available. When a scene, or part of a scene, repeats word for word, I feel it undermines the hard work that the writer has put in, reducing any drama and spoiling the professional appearance.

Some scenes, if not all, are best developed with the writer and designer working together. Scenes aren’t just about giving the player important game information, but also for developing the characters, working through sub-plots and for creating dramatic tension and conflict. Subtext, while not something that’s been particularly strong in games so far, will come increasingly into play, as character acting and facial expressions continue to improve and tools are developed that allow subtle acting to become a common part of games.

Only when a designer and writer both understand the story, character and gameplay needs of all scenes will they be able to deliver something very special.

© Steve Ince, 2004

Developing Thoughts 13

Dialogue? What dialogue?
Part Two

There are many games where dialogue is an important part of the gameplay experience, yet it’s often handled in a way that strikes me as being far too convenient. Supporting characters almost fall over themselves in their eagerness to give the player the information he needs to progress. The following lines illustrate a simplified version of a common structure.

“Hello, we’ve never met before.”
“That’s okay. If you get me Madonna’s autograph I’ll tell you the secret password.”

What just happened, here? As a player I was given game information too suddenly and I was taken aback - I feel cheated that it happened too easily. How on earth did this character know I wanted the secret password? Was I aware that I wanted this information?

There are two problems that arise from an exchange as short as that – the structure of the conversation itself and the imparting of game information.

We all know how conversations work from experience, even if we cannot write. This knowledge comes from interacting with other people on a day to day basis, over-hearing conversations on the bus, and from the wealth of TV and film we’re all exposed to, as well as many other examples. When we experience a conversation that falls outside of what we expect, it immediately puts a strain on our suspension of disbelief. The following lines approach the interaction in a more convincing way.

“Hi, I’m Brad Green.”
“So?”
“I understand you know the password to the Kitty Klub.”
“You understand wrong.”
“Tommy Smith told me -”
“Tommy Smith talks out of his backside. Now get lost.”

Admittedly, the player didn’t find out about the autograph, but we believe the structure because it fits with our experiences. We have also created dramatic conflict because the player character (and the player) has not achieved what he expected to. This failure to get the information suddenly throws up the need for more gameplay in order that the player character can finally convince this person to give him the password. Or to find out why Tommy Smith was lying. Or something else entirely. The actual gameplay and the route to the information will take different forms depending on the genre of the game involved.

Dialogue must not only serve the needs of drama and gameplay, it must also be written in a way that’s in keeping with the nature of the characters involved. What if the holder of the password was incredibly chatty, but only ever talked about himself? The conflict could be made humorous rather than sinister. What if they were sad, or drunk, or in fear for their life? What if they were in the pay of someone who wants you to have the information, but they’ve got to make it seem like you’re forcing it out of them? The potential for variety is endless.

The key to building good dialogue structure is to start by understanding what the agendas of the characters are so that you have two points of view when writing each scene. It might be something simple like the other character not wanting to talk with anyone. If it’s one of the major characters in the story, though, it’s likely that the agenda the character has will relate to the plot and may well change depending on how far along the plot the player has progressed.

Even with the best structure in the world, dialogue can often fail if it’s written in a way that sounds clumsy when spoken aloud. The only solution here is to speak the lines out loud, act them out, and any weaknesses will quickly be evident.

Of course, that introduces a different type of problem. When you’re in the middle of a gritty dramatic conversation with yourself and your partner walks into the room, having her fall about laughing makes you wish you’d rented office space away from home.

© Steve Ince, 2004

Developing Thoughts 12

I'm going to blast them all onto the blog in one go. You have been warned! :)


Dialogue? What dialogue?
Part One

Not a simple subject even at the best of times, I realised as I was writing this that what I wanted to touch on could only be done by spreading it over two columns.

I’ve worked almost exclusively on games where the dialogue between characters is developed to a high degree to maximise the relevance to the game, staying true to the characters and laced with high interest and humour. This often affects the way that I respond to dialogue in other games. While there are many games that handle dialogue very well, others contain character speeches that really don’t fit the true meaning of the word dialogue.

Many game developers choose not to have the main character speak for numerous valid reasons. For instance, the player may create their own character from a choice of templates and having the character speak would mean having to record a huge number of line variations to make the dialogue fit the character. The downside to this non-speaking player character is that, because conversations with other characters are often one-sided, it can give the impression that the player is simply listening to a series of mini monologues.

Sometimes these monologues are triggered by proximity of the player character, which can in itself create an artificial feeling because suddenly, this character you’ve never met before, is giving you plot-relevant information without being asked. Even in games where conversations are triggered and controlled by the player, because the player character doesn’t speak, the other character’s lines are often structured in a way that gives more information than you’d normally expect. In a film or a novel, the main character would only get the information they need by a dynamic exchange of dialogue. When characters are not reacting to anything the other character is saying, the speech always comes across as a little surreal and this in turn strains at the immersion the player gets from playing the game.

It may well be that monologue conversations are a necessary part of certain types of games, though I find that hard to imagine. If this were the case, however, writing monologues would need to look towards doing so in a way that will give the maximum dramatic effect and may lead to an expansion of existing writing vocabulary. Not an insignificant task.

The main burden of the monologue approach is that the character speaking is effectively doing the work of two characters by second-guessing what the player character wants and providing detailed answers. This actually has a knock-on effect of weakening the main character because they simply listen to the monologues in a very passive way. What’s the point of developing a dynamic character that fights for his life while trying to save the world, if he shows no reaction to important revelations from the other characters?

When games are becoming increasingly realistic in their rendering of characters, adversaries and locations, it often feels that elements of the game that don’t match this approach are things that can destroy the suspension of disbelief and prevent the player from achieving a fully immersive experience.

Because two-way conversations – dialogue – are such an important part of our everyday lives, monologues will always come across as artificial because they do not represent the way we talk. As games continue to become increasingly sophisticated the artificial feel will only increase.

© Steve Ince, 2004

Developing Thoughts 11

I've really been lax in updating these and it's been nearly a year since I posted the last one, which was the tenth in the series. So thanks to Erwan for giving me a nudge on this. I've also been through the older posts and attached labels to them so that you can find them all in one place.


Showing Character

Deciding the type of characterisation for the main character of a game can be one of the most important parts of concept development. If the character doesn’t suit the needs of the game, there is a good chance that the game as a whole will suffer as a direct result.

If the game’s story is one of its most important aspects, coming up with an idea for a main character may follow the initial outline of the story. Once the character starts to form, this feeds back into the story and the two play off each other, becoming more and more complex as other characters, particularly the antagonist, are introduced. The result of this should mean that the story and character are completely at one with each other and, if the design process has been completely successful, with the gameplay, too.

An alternative method is to create the character first and then decide the story he will be involved with, which can be a much more difficult route. Of course, no character can be created completely in a vacuum, so the design team will likely have a good idea of the type of story the character will be involved in before the character is developed.

In many character-driven stories, the main character goes through a transformation of sorts as the story unfolds and is no longer the same person at the end as he was when the story began. This transformation may not always be desirable, particularly if the character is expected to become central to a whole series of games. For a continuing series, character progression in each story should be relatively minimal or the changes could take him/her away from what made the character right for the central role in the first place. One of the reasons the James Bond films have been so successful over the years is that as a character he’s been pretty well defined and he tends to end the film the same person that started it. The stories revolve around his job rather than him as a person and are what is known as event-driven rather than character-driven. Many games fall into this category and so the Bond level of characterisation is about right for these, offering up many chances for sequels.

You will often read in books that you should avoid stereotypes at all cost, but sometimes the main character needs to be nothing more than a stereotype because this may help the player get a handle on what the character represents from the very beginning of the game. The gameplay may be all-important and any story and characterisation is superficial at best. The requirements from the character are not what he/she is like as a person, but what their gameplay abilities are – how high can they jump, how fast can they run, and so forth. If Mario suddenly started questioning his place in the world and became angst-ridden, then players would rightly complain that he’s no longer the character they came to love. Mario has become his own stereotype, but one that works perfectly within the context of the games he’s used in.

Naming your characters can be much more difficult than creating them in the first place. If James Bond had been called Reginald Periwinkle, Ian Fleming may never have sold his first Bond novel. Sometimes I feel that every name I ever choose for a character could be better (with the exception of Scout the One-Eyed Cat, of course). I always know when a name definitely won’t work, but finding one that definitely will work can be so elusive.

Although getting a good name is important, it’s also got to fit the style of character. A strong and bold name wouldn’t necessarily fit a character who’s really just an ordinary guy thrust into a series of events outside of his control. Yes, he may rise to the challenge and become a hero, but choosing a name that fits his initial nature can emphasise just how far he’s come in his journey through the story.

© Steve Ince, 2004

Writers' Forum

I just received two copies of the March edition of Writers' Forum in the post. I wrote a full-page article for them, which was designed to help promote my book, Writing for Video Games. When I set out to write the article I actually found it a little hard to approach - how do you put over the subject matter of a whole book in 800 words? The article had to act as both taster and overview, which was a pretty tall order, but I think I managed to pull it off.

Also in the magazine was an advertisement for the book with a special offer on it which gives the readers the opportunity to buy it at the reduced price of ten pounds - nearly a three pound saving! Unfortunately, they printed the advert slightly wrongly and left off the publisher's website, so to make amends they're printing the advert again in the next issue. Swings and roundabouts...

It's been pouring down with rain here and the post person clearly hadn't been keeping the letters covered. The envelope the magazines game it was soaking and the edges of the magazines are wet. If they don't dry out properly I may have to buy another copy to keep for my records. :(

A Better Perspective

Those of use who actively work in the adventure genre and many of those who just like playing the games, are a little tired of reading tiresome reviews in which the reviewer says (ad nauseum) that "the adventure game is dead". So imagine my pleasant surprise when I read the review of the latest Sam & Max episode over at Eurogamer and found it was taking a much more balanced view and saying such things as:

"To my mind, innovation isn't a pre-requisite to gleaning entertainment, from whatever source, and I was, personally, extremely grateful that Telltale didn't attempt to fix something that wasn't broken with misguided 'innovation'."

Well said!

I do worry that the "innovation" aspect is too predominant as a whole and is part of why games are so expensive to make and therefore so expensive to buy. But that's a digression for another post, perhaps.

There is always the worry that a review which defends adventures is going to be too biased the wrong way, which is a slight tendency for "fan" reviews, probably in every genre when you think about it. However, Kristan Reed was pretty fair in his comments and even picked up on the re-use of locations as putting the game into a rut. This, though, was the kind of constructive criticism that game developers need and although it clearly had an effect on the review score (7/10), I would imagine that Telltale will be more than happy with what was said.

If every game could get such a fair review we'd all be much happier as developers and players.

It's my birthday...

Another notch added to the age stick!

Birthdays seem to come around ever faster with each passing year and although I'm not usually one to use birthdays as a means of reflection, I do wonder how I'm ever going to fit everything in that I want to do.

I was looking back over all of my bits and pieces - ideas, notes, drafts, etc. and when I counted them all up I found that I have fourteen different projects in various stages of develoment. Many are still just ideas that I've feretted away for future reference, but others are pretty advanced.

For instance, I have a novel that I want to write that could turn into a seven volume series. I have a short film script that exists in two versions. I have the first episode of a six episode sitcom (which I just read again and was pleasantly surprised by). And I have lots of game project ideas, of course.

Because I know I'll never get the opportunity to develop all of the game ideas, if anyone out there is interested in them please get in touch.

The Design Process...

A couple of days ago I read a short review of my book in Edge magazine and I must admit that I was a little miffed that they'd missed the whole point behind the book.

There's an element to the writing in Edge at times which conveys a kind of "we know all this stuff so everyone else should" and this was very blatant in the review. Yes, there are chapters in the book that cover a lot of ground that gamers and developers may know already, but judging by the feedback I've received, there are a lot of readers who are grateful for the approach I've taken.

The biggest slant of the book was that it was written for writers who want to know about writing for games and I put that writing into the context of development.

There was, however, one bit of the review that got me thinking a great deal, for which I'm thankful. The review said that the best parts of the book was when I concentrated on the process itself - the dialogue chapter and the appendices are examples of this.

With that in mind I thought that if I could create a book in which I took the reader through my own creative process of writing and designing games and creating a game design as part of that process, perhaps that would be much more valuable for those within the industry. In a way it would be like my Developing Thoughts pieces, but with much more meat upon the bones.

This would be a project that could take a long time to do, (and I may release it a chapter at a time) but hopefully I can make it something that would give some insight to those interested.

Mr. Smoozles - 200 Strips!

The strip I've just posted is the 200th I've created for Mr. Smoozles!

I'd like to thank everyone who's been supporting the strip and hope that you'll continue to do so and I hope that it go from strength to strength with your help.

Mr. Smoozles Goes Nutso - a new review

Game Tunnel has just published a review of my game, Mr. Smoozles Goes Nutso. It's a very good review that looks at the game pretty favourably.

"Players may actually find themselves liking this game more and more as they play."

"Mr. Smoozles Goes Nutso is the kind of game that should satisfy the waking hours of any gamer who enjoys the strategy and scavenging from classic point-and-click titles, but wants something with a bit more interactivity and driven action."

Cartoon Tiger Commission

Caroline Owen, a wonderful violinist who has a MySpace page here, asked me to create a cartoon tiger playing the violin. Caroline once toured with a circus where she dressed in a tiger costume to play.

Her music is well worth checking out.

Mr. Smoozles Goes Nutso - a top game!

The Dutch gaming magazine, PC Gameplay has apparently published a list of what they consider to be the best indie games of 2006 and Mr. Smoozles Goes Nutso is one of those featured. There's no online version of the article, but it's pretty cool all the same. Thanks to Christiaan Moleman for letting me know.

Art for Sale and Commissions!

I've decided to branch out a little and offer some of my work for sale.

Because of the way that I work, I can't offer original art of any of the comic strips, but I can sell you high quality, full colour A4 prints of any strip you like, including my older strips. Each print will be signed by me, too.
Introductory Price: 12 GBP per print + postage and packing.

Also, if you wish to commission unique artwork from me, please contact me with details of your requirements. The subject matter can be anything that suits my drawing style and sensibilities.The price will depend on each individual commission.

For more details, please check out this page.

Mr. Smoozles - New Style!

Today sees the introduction of a new style for my strip, Mr. Smoozles. I've moved away from the old approach, which was basically a copy-and-paste method of creating the strips, in an attempt to give the strip a little more life. The new approach will also allow me greater creative freedom.

Any feedback will be greatly appreciated.

Forum Post Link Blog Entry

There's a thread over at the Adventure Gamers forums asking about blogs that have a connection to adventure games, so I thought I'd post something to make it seem as though I occasionally update here with something relevant.

I'm actually very close to finishing off the writing and design for a really cool adventure that comes out later this year. I'm really pleased with the way the ending has come together, so I'm hopeful that we won't get the "disappointed by the ending" comments that so many games seem to have suffered in recent years. Unfortunately, I'm unable to say anything more about the game for the time being.

As you may be aware, my comic strip, Mr. Smoozles, is going through a little upheaval at the moment. All should become very clear this week and if it doesn't then please yell at me.