Writing as a Cornerstone
Jennifer Hepler, Writer: At BioWare, we have a rather unique structure that involves a lot of back and forth between the various departments of the team. The writers begin by designing a story, with space for combat and interesting challenges. This is refined by our technical designers to suit the gameplay needs. Once they approve, the writers begin work on the dialogue. When this is complete, the tech designers implement the plot, and it is tested and reviewed by a wide range of disciplines on the project.
Because many departments are dependent on having finished writing before work can begin – technical designers can’t implement unwritten plots, cinematic designers can’t stage unwritten dialogue, voice-over and audio can’t work on unwritten, unrecorded dialogue, and so forth – the writing often takes place before much of the combat or systems are working in the game. So, while we know there will be tactical combat and we always aim to implement boss fights and fun gameplay, we often don’t get to see it in action until well after the writing has been locked down and recorded.
Though Dragon Age II is a sequel, nothing from this project was known or planned when we were working on Dragon Age: Origins. While we always hoped the game would be successful enough to launch a franchise, that’s never a guarantee until it happens. Developing Origins was such a long process and went through so many changes of leadership that we were able to start DAII with a pretty fresh slate. We’d already told our “ancient evil rising” story, so by the end of the Origins project we were able to discuss what the most interesting parts of the world had turned out to be and how to turn those into more central game elements. For example, it was rather confining to have all mages locked in the Circle tower, so in DAII, mage freedom became a central part of the conflict to make their unique situation a broader part of the game.
There are no “big secrets” among the writers as to where the main story is going, and nothing is set in stone. So, while we have general ideas of which stories we want to tell – we’d definitely like to do more with Tevinter, the Qunari, Orlais, and the Fade, for instance – exactly what will happen in each game isn’t set until it goes into production.
At the beginning of a project, we usually have a list of main character concepts (like “human male rebel mage”) that are put together by the lead writer and lead designer. Then all the writers get to say who they’re interested in. We’ve generally been very lucky in that our different personal interests have led all of us to focus in on different profiles, so there wasn’t much competition for who has custody of which characters. After that, those basic character concepts get fleshed out by the individual writer and the team. If someone feels strongly about an idea, they’re usually allowed to run with it. For example, for Anders in DAII, I really wanted to try doing a cursed Angel-and-Buffy-style romance, which we hadn’t done at BioWare before. We settled on using Anders and Justice from Awakening for this purpose.
It is each writer’s responsibility to make sure that their characters have a consistent voice by reading all related lines in all other writers’ conversation files, attending their voice-over sessions to work with the actor/actress and writing any non-plot dialogue for that character. One of my custody characters in DAII was Hawke’s mother, so I made sure that I reviewed her dialogue and character development from her first appearance in the Prologue through to her final voice-over session. We also discuss communally how major game characters, like companions, feel about each other. This allows our banter to demonstrate a consistent relationship between NPCs and makes them feel like real people.
As writers, we’re involved in changing systems that affect character relationships, such as companion approval. We’re always looking for ways to use in-game systems to increase the verisimilitude of our protagonists, so something like lessening the impact of gifts compared to Origins was an obvious low-hanging fruit for us. It just didn’t feel right that these people who were otherwise defined by the strength of their convictions could be convinced to like you if you gave them enough bottles of cheap wine. We attempted to correct that with the Friendship/Rivalry system in Dragon Age II.
I’d say that the relationships between characters is precisely what makes our series so roleplaying-friendly. In Dragon Age, we made characters who got under people’s skins. For example, many players felt sincerely bad when ending a romance with Leliana in Origins, not because it had any effect on their own character’s advancement in the game, but because they had come to care about her as a real person and hated making her cry. To me, that’s the ultimate achievement as a game writer – to make a player willing to make a disadvantageous decision in a game just to keep a fictional character from suffering.
T he Cinematic Experience
Frank Gordon, Cinematic Designer: A camera in a videogame has incredible freedom of movement and can be placed anywhere. This is actually a bit of a double-edged sword for us – it allows the creation of some truly spectacular moments, but it is very easy to create an unnatural looking shot. We study film techniques extensively and employ many of the same principles, but we have just as much fun breaking the rules as following them when it comes to composition and movement choices.
Every camera that we place is sending a subtle message to the player, and little things like the angle of a shot can convey a lot of information without the character having to say a word. These types of techniques generally go hand-in-hand with the narrative as they have to support one another or it will feel weird to watch. Ultimately, we conform to the tenets of cinematography in the same way as film, and that is one of the ways that we contribute to furthering our medium as an art as much as entertainment.
John Epler, Cinematic Designer: Technical limitations meant that early videogame cinematics had to be more skilled in the delivery of visual storytelling. Now that voice-over is expected, we have to find a new balance between image and dialogue. For writers, I think there’s a bit of a tendency to “play it safe” and write whatever they think might be needed. And that’s completely understandable – we don’t always manage to hit every line, and so what you thought might be carried by cinematic design could be missed due to time constraints. While the writers sometimes give us a little more than we need, they’re extremely accommodating when we ask them to rewrite or remove something, because they believe in the saying “show, don’t tell” every bit as much as we do. So if a line (or even a series of lines) can be replaced with a meaningful look or a well-placed gesture, they’re always on board.
That’s why we tend to be pretty involved in the briefs for the scenes. If the work isn’t feasible, or if the time required isn’t justified, other stakeholders will change things to accommodate. Once the brief is done and the scene is in our hands, we still have a lot of freedom. In the intro to Varric’s Act 2 quest, all I received were a few lines of dialogue. I did that scene when I was on a bit of a Sergio Leone kick, so we ended up with the very Western-style standoff. And that’s actually a great example of us getting assets changed to accommodate our ideas.
Frank Gordon: Cool scenes, especially ones with dragons, are the best parts of our job. They are just as fun to build as they are to watch. We are very open to suggestions and feedback from the whole development team, and when we get a great idea for a scene, we don’t mind crunching a little extra to get it done. Having said that, our use of resources is a constant concern and we don’t always have time to do everything that we would like to do.
Kaelin Lavallee, Technical Designer: Assessing the value versus cost is important. Good value for reasonable time and effort means the asset will probably make it into the game. Lots of work for a minor detail is not usually worth it. Sometimes, ideas are good on paper but aren’t realistic or don’t translate well to gameplay. If we don’t think that a certain encounter or experience would be enjoyable – or if we do, and it doesn’t test well – we discard it and focus on the things that are fun.
For instance, the “gang” quests are a great addition. They provide some relatively inexpensive, yet fun gameplay to the somewhat spacious night-time areas. This gives the player exploration, combat, XP, items and coin and fills out the world at the same time. The letter system works well for quest delivery or reactivity and saves a lot of unnecessary dialogue and cinematics, which made room to work on other areas of the game. These are two examples of win-win situations for developers and players.
John Epler: We’d rather the other departments in the team ask too much than too little, though. When someone says, “I want this awesome thing to happen,” there’s usually a scramble as everyone tries to claim it for their own. The big scenes are almost always the most fun to do, even if they’re the most work, and you end up learning a lot more about both the toolset and your own abilities when you push out of your comfort zone.
Geordie Moffatt, Technical Artist: On Dragon Age II, we tried not to draw any creative lines. We know we can achieve outstanding animation and effects in-house. Several scenes required the creation of custom tools and a lot of R&D across multiple departments, but it was worth it to get that extra “Wow!” factor. For example, the Chantry explosion cutscene was challenging and went through many iterations, but the final version really makes you sit back in your seat with your jaw open.
Frank Gordon: The capacity for cutscenes completely rendered in real-time by the game engine has really changed the way cinematics are incorporated in games. It’s one of the reasons why dialogue looks so different from last-gen titles. The ability to incorporate cutscenes into gameplay and dialogue leads to a more homogeneous, cinematic experience, and I think we’re just scratching the surface.
John Epler: Clearly, the job of cinematic designer is one that is still in its infancy. We have a role that’s more akin to that of a director on a film set than anything else, and this is only possible given the improved visual fidelity of games in the past five years. Currently, there’s a bit of a divide – dialogue feels connected but very separate. Eventually, conversations will happen parallel to the gameplay, allowing for a more integrated experience. I see cinematic design playing a huge part in making this happen.
Building on Feedback
Mike Laidlaw, Lead Designer: We are certainly very aware of both player and critical feedback for Origins. We analyzed and compiled every magazine and internet review. We also highly value what fans think, so we try to take as much feedback as possible into consideration when we move forward with future projects. It’s impossible to please everyone, but I think we’ve managed to hit a “sweet spot” with DAII. It stays true to its roots while improving on many existing systems.
For instance, the art of Origins was gorgeous, but it didn’t particularly stand out on its own. So our team “hot-rodded” the art. Now we have a bold, easily-identifiable style – a visual signature that is grim, bloody and sexy.
Combat is another example. People loved the action and combat in Origins, but the pace was a bit slow and the mages were highly overpowered. So in Dragon Age II, we kept the tactical elements, big boss battles and the plethora of ability and specializations while revamping gameplay. Now controls are more responsive, each class has a unique and powerful style of play and combat is actively engaging and faster-paced. We also built a strategic, offensive cross-class combo system.
The same applies to narration. In Origins, everyone enjoyed the tough choices and the memorable characters with their own agendas, but the narrative and story took a long time to see the results of your actions. DAII is still filled with interesting conflict and in-depth, realistic characters, but we improved the system by having a framed narrative with a tighter story that responds to your decisions throughout the game.
Gary Conrad, QA: The feedback from QA is also an important part of the design process. This is one of the things that sets BioWare apart from a lot of other developers: QA is there right at the start of a project, working to ensure that all systems are being tested for possible bugs and end-user experience. Being involved from the beginning also means that it is much easier for QA experts to keep up to date with their knowledge of the game. Instead of being thrown into the deep end near the final stage of a project, the testers expand their knowledge of the game in lockstep with its development. This ensures that QA is always up to speed on all the intricacies of a game’s mechanics and allows for that extra level of polish.
Chad De Wolfe, QA: Being involved in the creative side of the project also means that we know who to talk to, and we can make suggestions to solve problems or bugs, which helps the other teams with their workload.
On first contact with the early versions of the game, testers didn’t necessarily feel challenged. It’s only when they got to the end, where they saw how many choices and checks the game made, that they got a sense of the size of their task.
Gary Conrad: There are tons of variables and dependencies in a game as large as Dragon Age II. Methodical testing for such a massive amount of parameters requires legions of spreadsheets detailing all the various combinations of events that have to be tested. These are the times when the testers sit down and work out the most absurd ways possible to break the game. When a title sells millions of copies, this is essential as you just know someone out there will be trying those very same crazy sequences of events.
The Editing Marathon
Chris Corfe, Editor: Editors are an excellent point of contact and liaison between departments because we see so much of the game. We work with writing, technical design, localization, voice-over and cinematic design, and we must view the game through all of these lenses while editing.
Such multitasking has its risks as well as its benefits. This is not too complicated early on as we are focused mostly on story feedback, brainstorming and editing. For DAII, however, we sent the game for translation and voice-over while we were still writing it, so when localization started, we really had to step up. We went through dialogue editing, voice‑over and non-voice-over lockdown, bug-fixing and finally the finishing touches: the manual, credits, last-minute text and dialogue tweaks and, of course, the guide!
It took a high-performance machine to pull off a complicated game of this scale that was in constant flux until the last day. This made the project demanding for the Dragon Age team and for external partners like Piggyback, but it was a rewarding experience. We were very fortunate to work with the most talented and dedicated people in the business.