GameCentral talks to the designer of the new Dawn Of War game, about earning new fans and the madness of Warhammer 40K.
No-brainers always seem to take forever when it comes to video games. Fans can be campaigning for a new sequel for years, and although they do eventually happen the wait is often as excruciating as it is inexplicable. The reason is usually something boring involving lawyers, but it was particularly puzzling as to why Sega bought developer Relic Entertainment back in
2013 but not the Warhammer 40,00 licence that would’ve allowed them to make Dawn Of War III. But it turns out they were just being coy, and actually Relic have been working on the game for the last two-and-a-half years…
Dawn Of War is a real-time strategy series set in the bizarre sci-fi universe of Warhammer 40,000. This is the franchise that spawned the phrase grimdark (from the tagline ‘In the grim darkness of the far future, there is only war’) so it’s something of a surprise to find that one of the most obvious differences in Dawn Of War III is a less detailed, more colourful art style. The game still looks great, but Relic’s desire to appeal to modern gamers, particularly MOBA fans, is obvious.
That’s also clear when it comes to what in other games would be referred to as hero units (as we discuss with designer Philippe Boulle there aren’t really any heroes in the Warhammer universe). The first of these is Gabriel Angelos who wields a giant hammer and is more powerful than a whole unit of normal Space Marines.
But joining him is an Imperial Knight, a giant robot mech woman called Lady Solaria. As was obvious from the game’s announcement trailer, robot walkers are a big theme for Dawn Of War III and at first it seems as if the Imperial Knight is unstoppable, with her chainguns for arms and long distance missile attacks. Naturally she’s very slow though, and a hard target to miss, especially for the technologically advanced Eldar that the mission offers as your enemies. (Orks are the other race in the game, but they’re not in the demo.)
Although we weren’t able to go hands-on with Dawn Of War III we were treated to an extensive playthrough of one of the levels. It was explained to us that one of the other big changes with the game is a move away from the smaller scale battles of Dawn Of War II, which almost became an action role-player at times, and back towards the more traditional base-building and larger armies of the first game. Although to be honest we see little evidence of this as the Space Marines barge their way across the map and through the assembled ranks of the Eldar.
You get to choose three hero (or rather ‘elite’) units before each mission and the third one in our demo are teleporting Assault Terminators. But to prove that elite units aren’t all powerful we see them quickly wiped out when set in unsupported. We find this quite encouraging though, as it does emphasise the fact that this is a strategy game where you have to think about your tactics properly and not just rely on tank rushes. Even if the tank is a giant mech woman.
Naturally, the guy playing does win in the end though, polishing off the Eldar base with a space laser called the Finger of God – which gets more powerful the more enemies you catch with it. Which is such overkill at that point in the battle that it seems a perfect way to conclude the demo. Relic has already proven their affinity for the Warhammer 40,000 universe and it’s a relief to see them back working on it after all this time. And with the bigger battles and MOBA influences hopefully this will be their most successful entry yet.
Formats: PC
Publisher: Sega
Developer: Relic Entertainment
Release Date: 2017
Warhammer 40,000: Dawn Of War III – never-ending war
GC:
So how come it took you so long to announce this? It always seemed very odd that Sega picked up the fantasy licence before Warhammer 40,000.
PB: [laughs] Well, I don’t think there was ever any doubt internally that we were gonna do Dawn Of War III. But absolutely with the THQ downfall/Sega acquisition there was a rough transition time there, figuring out licensing and all those things. But Sega’s been great for us, they really have given us the resources to re-strengthen our studio, after the hard times. And when we were ready to get going on Dawn Of War – when we felt we would do it justice – we got started. So we’ve been working on it for about two-and-a-half years. And we just didn’t want to talk about it until it was ready!
GC:
So did you know you had the licence two and a half years ago?
PB: Yes! I’m not sure when the final legal rigmarole ended, but we knew.
GC:
Games Workshop seem to be handling it in a very different way nowadays, as if they’re handing out licences by genre instead of just one or two companies having the exclusive rights.
PB: I can’t talk in too much detail, but I think in the past, long ago when the original Dawn Of War came out, Games Workshop had licensed it as a big master licence with THQ. So THQ tried to do all kinds of 40K games, and I think Games Workshop saw in the new modern marketplace, with lots of indie developers and the mobile space, they saw a lot more opportunity in licensing certain parts of it. So as a Warhammer fan – I’ve been a Warhammer fan for 25 years or more – it’s great a time because there’s a bunch of great digital games coming out.
GC:
I always imagine Warhammer fans as being like metal fans. In that as much as they love it they realise, and revel in, the inherent absurdity of it all.
PB: Yes, absolutely!
GC:
But it must be very difficult to make a video game based on a franchise where everyone in the entire universe is just deeply unpleasant.
PB: [laughs] Yes!
GC:
It must make storytelling difficult in particular, because you’re in danger of not caring who wins or loses.
PB: When you first come to it, it can be a challenge. But what I find really interesting about it is embracing and taking that satirical edge that it involves, embracing the over the top craziness, and the dark background allows you to set up some interesting contrasts.
What does a hero look like in a society that’s built around war that lasts for tens of thousands of years? It’s not, ‘Let’s fight for another few years and we’re gonna win for the homeland’. No, we’re going to be fighting forever. So how do you make an individual fight matter? That’s an interesting challenge.
I really think that satirical edge, that dark, more… at least from a North America perspective, more British…
GC:
It is very British. British comic books didn’t invent any superheroes, they invented Judge Dredd.
PB: [laughs] My joke is that 40K, Judge Dredd, and Iron Maiden covers were flatmates back in the day.
GC: [laughs]
PB: They’re all really a critique. But it’s really important that the people you portray in the setting aren’t aware that they’re a critique. You need to be, but it just creates a really interesting space that makes it unique compared to worlds of just straight-up military sci-fi.
This is more science fantasy, and it’s dark, and there are no good guys – like you said. I’m sure if I’m a human in 40,000 years from now I might chose the Imperium of Man over any other option but it wouldn’t really be a good choice. If I saw a space marine coming I’d be like, ‘Oh, he’s going to destroy my planet in order to save me. Great!’ [laughs]
GC:
Do they still all have British accents as well?
PB: They do, yeah.
GC:
I loved Mark Strong in the Space Marine action game.
PB: Oh he was fantastic, I loved working with Mark. He was great.
GC:
He’s not in this is he?
PB: No, but it’s the same voice director and the same recording studio. They just have a great cast and a great pool of actors.
GC:
I’d love to see how you explain to an actor what the Warhammer universe is all about.
PB: [laughs] We spend a lot of time focusing on the individual characters and trying to give them a few references that we like. There’s this element from this role and this element from this role. And then giving them a sense of the insanity of the setting. And honestly, working with British actors it’s easier to explain. Because it comes from the zeitgeist that they maybe experienced themselves… they get it.
GC:
Now I want to know if Mark Strong used to paint the little figures as a kid.
PB: [laughs]
GC:
So, it’s been five years since the last Dawn Of War expansion, let alone the sequel… I imagine when starting this you took a long hard look at both the franchise and the wider state of the genre. Such as it is nowadays.
PB: Definitely. Immediately after the second expansion we were doing downloadable content, and then the whole THQ debacle happened. So when we regrouped after all that, and sat down to do this version, it had already been a while. We knew it would be a large gap. So we took the time to look back at what elements from the previous games that we wanted to bring forward. What had stood the test of time. That’s where we fell on the large armies from the first Dawn Of War, married to the heroes from the second of Dawn Of War.
But as you say, it also meant taking a look at the modern strategy space. What did we need to do to deliver a game experience that spoke to people who were playing strategy games now? And that’s where a lot of our decisions around clarity; responsiveness; sort of crisp, fast gameplay came from. ‘Cause that’s really what the marketplace expects now.
You go back, and I still love the original Dawn Of War and Dawn Of War II. But I go back and play them, and after playing Starcraft II and other games I’m look, ‘C’mon, respond! Let’s go, let’s go!’ And so we needed to bring that modernisation there.
Warhammer 40,000: Dawn Of War III – Gabriel Angelos has a big hammer
GC:
Starcraft is the obvious point of comparison… in more ways than one [a dig at the fact that Blizzard’s designs for Warcraft and Starcraft are clearly heavily inspired by Warhammer – GC]
PB: [laughs]
GC:
And yet Starcraft is very fast-paced and focused on tournament play. And it didn’t really look like your demo was going in that direction, especially given how slow many of the Warhammer units tend to be.
PB: No, no. We are focusing on campaign play as the thing that will bring people to it, and the thing that will bring returning players – that’s where they’ll start. So that’s where we’re rolling out the welcome mat. We absolutely are going to launch with a full suite of multiplayer. People will be able to play with and against their friends in multiplayer on day one.
And we are making a game that’s a lot of fun to watch, so if that takes off in the eSports space or competitive space, great. But that’s not what we’re building towards. We’re building towards that really fun experience.
And just to hit on that point of Warhammer feeling slow. You’re right, like a big unit like the Imperial Knight, you wouldn’t expect it to be dancing across the field. But it’s important that the player understand quickly that their command has been issued. So even though she’s slow she does immediately start that movement. And that’s the type of thing we wanted to make sure was there.
GC:
I saw Halo Wars 2, and the thought that occurred to me there is that to the layman the whole real-time strategy genre still looks and, on a surface levels, plays pretty much the same as it did at its inception. I almost hate myself for thinking that, but that must be an issue for you?
PB: No, no! It is definitely the type of thing we think about. I think it’s important though, not to reinvent the wheel when there’s a reason that sort of isomeric camera works.
GC:
I said to the Microsoft guy that the problem is that the genre was created almost perfectly formed.
PB: [laughs] I think there has been a progression in some of the visual presentation. But yeah, the basics – like that sort of eye of god camera, controlling a large army, sending it smashing into the enemy, selecting your heroes… that’s what our game is about and I’m proud of that. I don’t have any worries about that.
Warhammer 40,000: Dawn Of War III – Lady Solaria takes no prisoners
GC:
Pacing has definitely changed over time though. It’s constantly getting faster and faster, almost like an action game.
PB: Pacing in a mission, especially, is a difficult beast. We spend a lot of time working with it, trying to get it right. You change one lever and all kinds of things happen. But you’re right, getting that right pacing, that sense of the escalation over the course of the match is really important. My personal preference is I would rather have more player agency than constantly having really tight pacing.
Because often, the tighter the pacing, the less variety there is in how you play. So I would rather have a challenge that you can approach in a bunch of different ways. That being said, pacing is one of my… like, I say that word five or 10 times a day. There are pacing charts up on my wall and I just try to pay attention to that a great deal. It depends mission to mission, I would say.
GC:
How do you design a mission in a RTS? Do you have a big map on your wall as well?
PB: So there’s two major tools that we use. One is a map, because we know we’re going to play in a map space – so that maps out the encounters. And then there’s a pacing chart over time. And that charts not only the intensity of the experience, but also difficulty and challenge as two separate things. So that gives us a goal of what we want to do. So that that’s sort of the what and the map is almost the how.
And then we usually do a list of encounters that we want to build, and then a lot of it becomes prototyping. Getting it up and running and iterating from there.
GC:
When you’re trying the game on players, particularly non-RTS players, what are the sorts of things they say? I imagine waiting around and dead time are the biggest problems? But do you try to change that or do you just leave it because that’s how the game’s supposed to be?
PB: That’s a really good question. When we’re looking to attract a large audience, which we are, the heroes are a really good way for us because that’s something that’s very understandable, you can grab into it. And then use those within the army and discover the depth of the army as you play. With the heroes there’s a lot less waiting around, so that’s an important part of it.
Relic games have always been frontline-based, so we’ve minimised a lot of the waiting around. Even when you’re building up in the early game you’re usually still sending troops out to capture points and engage in skirmishes. In terms of what we hear from people that are new to it, I would say the biggest thing, and the thing we’ve tried to spend a lot of time on, is just the clarity.
When it gets to the mid-game especially, and later, it can get really overwhelming for people. So we’re trying to build a quite clear language of effects and then an under-the-hood system that people can figure out and dig out. So they can understand what’s happening: why did I lose that encounter?
The ideal feeling for a strategy game, after you get beaten, which happens in a strategy game, is, ‘Oh, I wonder if I could’ve done X?’ The worst is, ‘Oh no! I just lost and I have no idea why!’ As long as we’re leaning towards the first way it’s creating a more welcoming space. That’s our major strategy.
GC:
OK, that’s great. I look forward to playing it soon.
PB: Definitely, good to see you.
Read more:
http://metro.co.uk/2016/07/21/warha...-grimdark-strikes-back-6020370/#ixzz4FLGL5PfB
