Q: Setting is an important RPG element. It's a foundation of a game and sometimes even a pretty good reason to play one. So, how do you create and breath life into new worlds? What's your process, what are the steps? What are the most important setting elements, what must be done right?
Avellone: This is going to be a little bit of rambling seeded with examples, but bear with me.
When approaching world design (and with more recent IPs I’ve been working on at Obsidian), I usually begin with “what do I want the player to do that’s the coolest thing ever?” Whether that’s allowing the player to convince a mutated dominant lifeform out to enslave the future that his master plan is wrong and talk him into committing suicide, great. If that’s allowing the player to stand in a fortress built out of a thousand lifetimes of regrets on a plane of negative energy and argue with the possibilities my life about why it’s important I be allowed to die, great. If I want to stand in an ancient elven citadel shattered by magics and provoke two half-demons and their army into battle to prevent the destruction of the Ten Towns, so be it.
Asking “what would be cool to do as a player” is then followed by, “okay, what sort of framework could I build around the world to build up to that cool moment(s)?” World building is similar to story building in some respects… if I want to make a game where I can voyage inside an android’s brain, help a pregnant alley give birth, or a world where I can weave death sounds of the beasts I kill into audio-inspired spellcraft, that cool sample moment of player experience is the starting point, and I start constructing a framework around the world to support and give more power to those moments.
For raw material, I take a lot of notes from books, games, and movies, good and bad, and use those as tiny mementos for things I’d like to seed a world with. It can be anything from a profession name (“anathemathician” – which almost became the profession of a character in Planescape who could use chaos math to alter reality like spells), or the idea of an effect in the world called “consensus” (where if enough people within a certain radius believe in a course of action, all actions taken along those lines - defending, attacking, even menial labor - gain a pseudo hive-mind bonus), or even watching the movie Unknown and seeing the game puzzle possibilities in a character armed with an electronic car key trying to find the right place to stand in a sealed-off warehouse to trigger the car alarm outside as an SOS signal. All these mementos add up to flesh out a world unconsciously.
But practically speaking... if you’re starting with your own original IP, you want the setting and the world to complement your theme and your game mechanics. That may sound like a simplistic answer, but you want the world itself to be intertwined with the game system – one of the best examples of this is the Warhammer universe, which makes no pretensions what’s it’s there to do – it’s a world that leaks conflict, chaos, and everything about it complements the fantasy tabletop battle aspect. The world allows you a multitude of factions, a diversity of units, and a spell system that is focused mostly for large-scale conflicts (if you’ve ever played Warhammer Fantasy Role-Play, some of those 4th level spells could wipe a continent clean of life)… and the world even allows you to mutate new units if you want. Also, the theme of the world makes it clear that it’s always one step away from destruction unless you take violent steps to prevent Chaos from taking hold.
At Obsidian, we approached Alpha Protocol in the same way – we started with, "we want to make a cool espionage RPG,” then started dissected the genre into game mechanics that would help the player feel like they were part of an espionage drama. We’re pretty happy with how they’re turning out (details to come soon, I hope).
Next in world building, is another “practical” parameter – the scope of the game. System Shock 2 and Bioshock, for example, started with a good sense of how many levels and how much free-roaming the player was going to be allowed – and furthermore, how many actual conversations they were going to let the player have, so this factored into the design of their world. Bioshock’s Rapture and System Shock 2’s Von Braun are two isolated environments (in all dimensions), and it’s easy for the player to understand why these environments are isolated and why the player’s movements are naturally restricted. Next, both have suffered catastrophic disasters that have wiped out many of who would be considered “friendly conversationlists” in both environments, and in making these two choices in tandem with the scope of the game, the world has come to complement the design.
Also in world design, there’s the matter of accessibility. At some point, as irritating as it may seem, you need to decide how accessible this world is to the public. Do you want to shake them up a little? Do you want to present traditional fantasy escapism? Do you want to present a cliché world, then give it a twist one hour into it? Fallout and Planescape, for example, were arguably never as accessible in their presentation as the Forgotten Realms games, nor World of Warcraft, for example, both of which built on more mainstream fantasy and Tolkein-esque settings that players were more comfortable with.
Q: Personally I'm very curious about how you developed an RPG setting for Aliens, so if you can actually discuss it, maybe without being specific, that would be appreciated by all. You've mentioned that you watched the movies before you started. What did you learn and notice? What notes did you take? What were you first steps; what did you start from? - Vince
Avellone: With regards to Aliens, I was the Creative Lead on Aliens only during a chunk of pre-production, and then I transferred over to a Lead Designer position on Alpha Protocol. Josh ran with the storyline and world creation for Aliens after that – the characters developed for Aliens are all his, for example, and they're pretty awesome.
As an example of how to approach the setting, though, it's a good one, so I don't imagine speaking about the approach to it is really a huge breach of etiquette, and it's pretty similar to how we approach doing settings in other franchises.
Before beginning, we usually have a sense of what the engine will be for the game and what "type" of RPG we're creating (action, turn-based, 3rd person party, etc.). Following that, I try to absorb as much about the genre as possible, including any tangential or off-the-beaten path explorations of that genre (for example, I studied the Expanded Universe in Star Wars extensively, and for the Aliens genre, I also made sure to cover all the Predator vs. Aliens material as well as all the Dark Horse books and novels). The reason for this is pretty simple – one, you don't want to do a story or character someone else has already done in the field. Second of all, it lets you start listing all the hallmarks of the genre and what the core appeal is.
So, let's take Aliens as an example. What's cool about Aliens?
Well, it's scary. But why?
The Aliens typically attack people in situations where there's little or nowhere to run, and there's no way to get help quickly. Isolation to spur terror is a big part of the genre… no one is coming to save you.
The Aliens are a primal, predatory force. The more you know about them, the less scary they are (knowledge and details about your opponents makes them less threatening in general), so when introducing them, it's best to keep them as a nebulous, predatory force that serves as an adversary to the player.
Next, the threats in Aliens are actually two-fold. One is the aliens themselves, which are shadowy, nebulous threats lurking in the dark. The other threat is the human factor – routinely in the movies, it's the human psychological element that causes the secondary, and usually greater, threat. One could argue "the company" is basically another, equal shadowy nebulous predatory representation of the aliens. As an example, Burke's greed in Aliens is a huge threat. Hudson's panic is another. Gorman's arrogant by-the-book incompetence is another, his unwillingness to admit he's in over his head nor that he is unfit to command. Apone follows stupid orders. Vasquez is recklessly berserk, and her keeping her storm gun in Aliens and opening fire during the first encounter in the Hadley's Hope nest actually sets the timer limit on the detonation in the colony. Dallas in Alien is clearly apathetic about following the company's directives, and his apathy puts the crew in danger. Parker in Alien wants his share, etc, etc. All of these human elements serve to create equal, if not more, significant problems for the player. So having the human factor as a gameplay elements is equally important, and it should be tied into NPC and PC psychology.
Now, let's take Ripley. Ripley is the hero, and her strength is her perspective on the situation (usually the smartest perspective – "nuke them from orbit"), and her ability to take the psychological handicaps of her crew and immediate party members and either course-correct or overcome them (Hudson's fear, Newt's catatonia, Hick's unwillingness to step up and take command, Burke's sliminess, Ash's company loyalty, etc.). So this also seems to be an important part of the franchise.
So basically, you research, you immerse, you absorb, then you start distilling the keypoints of what makes the genre what it is and look for ways to make it part of the world you’re creating, and more importantly, part of the game mechanics.
Usually, after this point, I have a lot of notes, and I also start branching out into related movies that feature claustrophobic horror, or waves of enemy aliens, or more modern-day approaches to the sci-fi genre, and see if there's elements or key mechanics there that work that could also benefit an Aliens RPG.
Q: What are your preferences and thoughts in regard to storylines? Linear or non-linear? Epic or low-key? Formulaic or "chaotic"? Taking control from the player for extra drama (i.e. you fell asleep, was captured, and thrown in jail. Surprise!) or leaving the player completely in charge? What are your storytelling trademarks (or what storytelling aspects would you like to develop into your own trademarks)?
Avellone: I believe in non-linear “stories,” but I’d much rather have a game world filled with game mechanics and game systems that allow the player to make their stories without the drama being imposed on them. I think that gives more credit and fun to the player without dictating the experience to them – which to some story writers may seem to create a stronger experience, but I don’t agree, I think it just paralyzes the player and everyone else who plays the game to the same course of action, which isn’t really what a (Western) RPG is all about. It may work for other genres, but not in our case.
When creating a narrative for a game, stick with a theme, and have the world and the story echo it. Make it something you’re passionate about. As an example, I’ve always liked the Star Wars movies, but I always thought the premise behind the Force sucked. And the way it works raises a lot of disturbing questions. So, for a storyline, let's go with that… and the spine of Knights of the Old Republic II begins.
But setting up a story and a theme is not enough – and doing too much story can be claustrophobic to a player. In an RPG, letting the player share the world of the story is important – while the players should react strongly to the situations and setting you present to them, you need to give the player the room to have a story on their own, based on their experiences with the system and the encounters you've set up. As an example (and a poor one, but easy to identify with), players can respond more strongly to their story of how their dwarf warrior was able to defeat 20 orcs with only 3 hit points remaining by channeling them through a narrow dungeon corridor to emerge victorious… which is solely their experience with the game, and can be far more exciting and personal to the player than something you've scripted into the storyline. To this day, people still talk about their methods for trying to keep Dogmeat alive at the end of Fallout 1 in incredible detail.
Story-wise in the world, the player's experience in the world should matter. They should see changes and consequences based on their actions, and see that their existence and actions in the world are having an impact. It should also allow a player to interpret and develop their character, both game mechanic-wise and through interaction in the world. Some RPGs can provide a static character and character type from the outset and let the player step into their shoes, but I prefer RPGs that provide the player with a blank slate that they can sketch on. In Alpha Protocol, we do this by providing a cipher for the player to step into and then begin to develop his personality and his attributes through his interaction with the game world.
If I had storytelling trademarks, I say that most of the stories and worlds I’ve worked on have tended to veer to the dark end of the spectrum. I may have a pessimistic view of the world, but I think heroic actions become more heroic in a world that’s against you rather than one that’s cheery and helpful. I also lean toward not-quite-perfect endings, where not everything ends up happily ever after, mostly because I don’t believe in that.
I also believe in unrequited romances, but George Ziets helped me break some of that in NX1, which I will be thankful to him for until the End Days.
Q: Ok, so you have a setting and a story. All you have to do is populate it with characters. How does this step work? What rules if any do you follow? Templates? Do you have a dedicated "setting support" group of characters who flesh out and explain the setting? If yes, how does that work? Also, how do you turn a cardboard cut-out or a vague concept (we could really use a ninja-pirate here!) into a memorable and "real" character who has a potential to launch his own merchandise line?
Avellone: Well, back to theme and design constraints – the characters in this world need to reinforce the theme and the game mechanic experience you’re trying to deliver to the player. In Alpha Protocol, there are a number of character archetypes the player can encounter that are hallmarks and reinforce the tension and drama of the espionage genre… and make the player feel the theme all the more. In Planescape, most characters were designed to test the player’s alignment and encourage him to explore and learn more about himself by trying to figure out what people he had interacted with before – and what kind of person(s) he was before. In Knights of the Old Republic II, a number of characters in the game have pretty strong opinions about the premise behind the Force – they think it sucks. So we made characters that explore that theme. Kreia has strong opinions about the Force, and she has a reason why she thinks it sucks. The PC also has had an experience with the Force sucking, so you make that part of the PC's backstory, but let the player come to grips with how they feel about the whole situation – all the while giving them a series of characters that either mirror or act as sounding board for the player’s struggles. Have them echo the theme in their own way, from their own perspective.
In addition, characters need to be “smart.” This may be a stupid thing to say, but their motivations need to be presented in such a way that the player can be surprised by their independence but at the same time, it makes perfect sense to them while the character is behaving the way they should – it makes them start questioning and paying attention to the characters in the world rather than taking them for granted as caricatures of quest-givers and info merchants.
Also, each character should have a simple one sentence theme that if you described it to someone, they’d be curious to know more about that character. For example, “this character is a chaste succubus.” Or “a floating undead encyclopedia.” Once you have that one sentence hook, you flesh out the character around that by asking questions. For the chaste succubus… why is she that way? What would cause her to deny everything that’s considered the nature of a succubus? And how do we turn that around to the player’s theme… does turning away from her own nature cause her any internal emotional torment? Has she had to question her own nature and then decide on a course of action that she thinks is better for her lifepath? Does she have any regrets about it? If the player is facing these kinds of struggles as well, then she becomes a sounding board for the player’s own thoughts on the matter. Of course, one could argue that the narrative designer in that case (me), also simply thought that traveling with a chaste succubus as a party member would be kind of cool. Not to mention the high level of sexual tension such a situation could cause. But I digress.
Also (and I swear, this is the last “also”), there should be a game system present in interacting with characters – interactions should be another game system in the world with its own consequences. Part of this was the reason we started developing the influence system through Knights of the Old Republic II: The Sith Lords and the Neverwinter Nights 2 series… we wanted to make the player’s evaluation of the NPC’s personality and their respect for the PC to be part of the system, with effects that translated into their morale and performance in the game. We’re carrying through with a similar system in Alpha Protocol, but it’s more tailored to the espionage aspects, and we’re pretty excited about it.
