Posts Tagged Writing
My Awesome Theoretical Game Idea
Posted by kjohnson1585 in Uncategorized, Video Games, Writing on August 8, 2012
Over the past couple of months, I have been thinking about a game that, had I possessed the means, skills, finances, and opportunities, I would totally make. I decided to put my ideas onto this post, just so to have them down, and also so people can see them and comment on the idea, logistically and practically. I warn you – this may run long.
(I won’t get into the specific idea of the story, because I actually have it down as a pilot for a TV series, but I’ll detail everything else.)
I. Overview
Too many games today are gritty, dark, and gruesome. Don’t get me wrong – this is okay, but I would love to see more variety instead of egregious space or war shooters. Indie games may be on the right path, but many of them are about being quirky, retro, or “Art,” whatever that means. What I propose is a AAA game that has the scope of many of these shooters – with their variety of enemies, levels, weapons, and choices – but given a more light-weight, perhaps cartoony sheen. Think if Jak and Daxter 2 was infused with Deus Ex’s blood. More emphasis on a comic story than drama. In some ways, we used to do this all the time, but publishers went to where the money was. I think we can get back to the old PS1 days.
Imagine 3-5 characters, very different from each other, and non-human. Maybe aliens, or robots, or cartoon characters, akin to Conker. They’re sort of a team, but they’re really not; more like a bunch of characters thrust into a situation that they have to escape. Each character has different skills and abilities, but also think and act and control differently as well. Each level, or episode (I will explain this later), has you choose which one you want to ‘play’ as at first. This choice will change depending on the state of your team – let’s say someone broke his or her leg, or got sick. Then you can’t play as them. But for the most part you can choose who to start the level as. This allows for co-op play as well.
II. Goals and Choices
The main goal of the game is singular: keep your team alive throughout the entire game.
That’s it. If anyone dies or is left behind when you jump to the next level, you lose. You have to keep your team together. They can be tired, sick, annoyed, at each other throats – but no one can be killed. This sounds pretty straight-forward, except that keeping your team alive involves more than not getting shot.
Each level-episode involves making decisions that get tougher and more morally challenging as the game progresses. In Mass Effect, you more or less made choices that affected the world around you in order to save it. In this game, you make choices that emphasize the team instead of the world. So, to save a teammate, you have to decide whether you’ll, let’s say, assassinate a leader of a peaceful world, talk your way out of a hostage situation, or torture someone to get answers. The choices you make affect your morale (this also will be explained later) as well as the morale of your teammates. The choices are varied; sometimes, they’re just about idle chatter (very few cut scenes are involved; you participate in most, if not all, plot points), and sometimes they’re about life-or-death. Again, this is similar to Mass Effect, but instead of only choosing for Shepard, you have to choose for the variety of characters you can control.
This sounds dark, but remember, the tone is lighter, so more akin to maybe the first few Harry Potter books, or Ratchet and Clank.
III. Importance of (Understanding) Characters and Dialogue
You have to get to know your characters inside and out. You have to know their strengths and master them; and you have to know their weaknesses and work around them. This encompasses not only abilities, but dialogue choices and decision making.
For example, if one of your characters is very nervous and high-strung, but extremely smart, you’re not good in fighting areas. You have to do more running than combat – but, to be fair, your character can run pretty fast. You more or less dive and hide, and are fairly good at this too. Your dialogue choices depend on who you’re talking to and what you’re talking about. Repairing machines? Solving puzzles? You’re choices are geared towards the getting the correct answer pretty fast (while someone else would have more disparaging, unclear choices.) However, making those choices with a time-limit will make those choices more difficult to answer, as your character can’t take pressure. Another character will have to shout encouraging remarks (or, if the second character is meaner, “tough love” remarks), to control that characters “morale” and keep him relatively calm as he solves the puzzle.
Likewise, you can control a character that’s great at gunfights, but sucks at puzzle solving. You can choose a character that’s awesome at close-quarter fighting, but can’t climb complex platforms. And so on. But you can work at improving those weakness through a variety of ways.
Characters, in this fake game, are more fun and “goofy” then the typical brooding protagonist. They should be expressive and endearing and verbose. They should be “funny” – not in dumb ways, but in a way that makes the player smile. The dialogue and flow of the conversations are geared towards fun instead of angst, but still important to get the plot points in as well as develop the characters. There are definitely dramatic moments in the game, but it is balanced by lighter banter as well. Dialogue that works well enough to keep people from skipping it, as well as important enough to pay attention to.
The second point is important, as to limit hand-holding and tutorials. If the dialogue and characters are strong, there will be no need to have characters repeat directions on what to do or fill the game with in-screen prompts. Yes, it would require playing often and it would discourage long waiting between play-throughs, lest you forget what to do next. But the game should be fun enough to keep the player engaged.
To make dialogue work in this fashion, I imagine the player you control can’t begin the dialogue; NPCs would have to say something, which prompts a dialogue tree or wheel for responses. I suppose there could be some points when you can comment on something first, but those moments would be scripted.
VI. Morale and RPG-Stat Building
Morale is, essentially, the state of your characters’ emotions at the time. Morale is constantly changing, depending on the situation. In a gunfight, the soldier will gain morale when he fights well, or lose it when he fights poorly. The high-strung character would simply lose morale unless he escapes the gunfight. If things get worse, he loses morale faster. Morale effects how your fight, think, perform actions, converse with people, solve puzzles, and gain stats. High morale allows you to shoot better, punch harder, dodge faster, climb marvelously, and solve puzzles with ease. Low morale causes wild aiming, missing punches, slow movements, falling when climbing, making puzzles harder, and slower stat gain.
You start the game with stats based on your character. The soldier has fairly high stats in shooting, but fairly low in problem solving and maybe social communication. The smart guy has high stats in puzzle solving, but practically none in close-quarter combat. The full range of stats have yet to be determined, but I thought about the following:
1) Gun Combat
2) Melee Combat
3) Stamina (length of time you can exert strenuous tasks, like long term climbing, sprinting, critical punches, etc.)
4) Climbing (determines what you can/can’t climb – ladders are low, trees are medium, brick walls being high)
5) Jumping (how far and high you can leap over things)
6) Puzzle Solving (focus on fixing equipment or devices to progress)
7) Intelligence (more about observing the world around you, allowing better uses of the environment, not needed for progress)
8) Social Discussion (ease of talking with people, whether on your team or not; allows a variety of commands)
9) Social Comprehension (observing social cues/ticks/behavior and exploiting them/using them to your advantage, akin to LA Noire)
10) Stealth (ability to sneak past enemies, cameras, etc.)
There certainly can be more.
Morale “trumps” those stats. If you have high morale, and high gun stats, you’re basically shooting head shots all day. If you have low morale, however, your exact gun stats won’t be affected directly, but you’ll have slightly worse aiming prowess in battle. If you have low morale, and you have low gun stats, you’re pretty much screwed in battle. Low morale affects choices in dialogue, stealth, and ability to solve puzzles as well.
Morale is based on essentially everything you do, say, and see. Talking to your team casually, during down time, boosts morale, so you’ll want to talk to them as often as possible. Talk about the past, shoot a few jokes, maybe make a pass at a potential relationship partner (this may make someone else jealous!). The better, empathetic choices in these conversations will boost morale even more (although it may not be the better choice to progress through a level). Again, it requires real understanding of your team, individually, and the state they’re in. You may have to console a teammate who saw his first person killed, ever. You want to be comforting, but if the enemy is coming, you may have to push him harder than needed. That affects his morale, but it also affects yours.
The stats can increase by many means. The more often you put the high-strung person in a gunfight, the more comfortable he gets, changing the amount of morale he’d lose. Give him a gun and keep him shooting, and he’ll get more gun combat experience. Even having him casually talk to the soldier about shooting and gunfights improves the gun stats, and in the down time you can “train” the high-strung person with weapons. This is across the board, too – talking to other teammates and “training” them can improve all the stats incrementally (what we may call indirect experience), which may be safer and easier that thrusting a character into an area where he has to be forced to use an ability he’s not good at (direct experience). You get more experience with the latter, but you also may get killed, or something could happen that would destroy a huge chunk of morale, which is counter-productive.
V. Levels (Episodes) Breakdown
For this game, it may be better to think of levels more like episodes of TV than chapters of a book. Each level-episode even has a title card and a teaser cutscene, which introduces the threat/issue in an amusing or dramatic way. Then the “level” begins, you choose your initial characters, then proceed.
Depending on the episode, something occurs that you have to deal with. Early episodes are easy. You have to shoot your way into a building, or protect an important device. Later episodes have you tending to a sick teammate during a zombie attack, or deciding whether to simply escape a base that’s being targeted for destruction, or help the people inside. One episode I envision include a complex mind-game with a brilliant psychopath who has a teammate hidden away, and you get to decide whether to negotiate, apply pressure, torture him, or flat out kill him and find the teammate yourself. A lot more complex episodes can be created, which can alter the dynamics of your squad and affect morale quite a bit.
There’s no achievements. There’s no rewards for doing the right thing, especially when “the right thing” becomes meaningless later in the game. There’s only survival, and if you do something wrong, or something you regret, you have to live with it. There’s no right answer, no “Paragon/Renegade” binary point building. Just what you feel you have to do to live.
VI. Gameplay
The game utilizes Cover-Based Shooting, Melee Sighting, Stealth Mechanics, Environmental Observation (Scanning), Dialogue, and Puzzle Solving. I’ll break down each one in detail.
Cover-Based Shooting is fairly straight-forward. One button causes your character to go into cover. Trigger buttons pulls your character out of cover and the other trigger button shoots. There are grenades and variety of weapons. There are also little things, like cover that’s breakable, and cover that’s moveable. You can roll or dive to another cover area as well. You can shout commands OR words of encouragement to other teams, to alter their morale in battle, especially for people who can’t shoot well or are too busy doing something else, like fixing an elevator. Even shouting “Stay down!” can give the morale a tiny boost, making their “puzzle solving” of the elevator that much quicker. Say it too much though, and you become annoying, and morale goes down. Plus, you distract yourself when you need to be blasting away.
Melee Fighting I’m still working on, but it would be a combination of timing-based fighting like Batman: Arkham City and combo-based fighting like God of War. During melee battles, you can run around the area freely, and you can punch, kick, block, grab, jump, and roll, as well as perform combos. This works against most thugs. When dealing with trained fighters, or fighting in REALLY close combat (like, inside a trailer park), this will not work. So you have to get close up with them. Holding a trigger button while unarmed puts you in “fighting stance”. When enemies swing at you in this stance, you automatically dodge. You have a “dodge meter,” based on stamina, that allows you to continually dodge while in the stance. When it goes to zero, you’re vulnerable to get hit. If multiple enemies are swinging at you, or you’re dealing with an enemy that will not let up, your dodge meter drains faster. You have to get in a series of blows, or stand still, to regain your dodge meter.
As you’re automatically dodging in fighting stance mode, you can press the various punch/kick/block/grab/jump/roll buttons to try and execute combos and counters. If an enemy swings a punch and you dodge it, pressing “punch” returns a quick punch to the face or stomach. Grab snatches his arm, and punch begins a beatdown, kick will knee them in his stomach, block will put a squeeze on him (choking him), grab again will throw them, and roll would slam them into the ground. There’s inherently a number of combo moves like this, as well as there being combos for both in “fighting stance” and outside of it.
However, as you deal with more and tougher enemies, they can themselves dodge and block and counter. (This is kinda similar to CQC in Metal Gear Solid, but easier to execute, especially when your stats are high enough). You have to play back and forth with them, attempt to overwhelm their stamina with yours. If your Social Comprehension is high enough, you can “scan” enemies to determine their health and their dodge meter, and use that to determine how best to wear them down.
IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE that a good portion of the game is NOT about winning a gun or melee fight, but surviving it. So you may have to distract a much stronger and powerful fighter until your method of escape arrives. Sometimes you do have to clear out a room, or best an opponent in fisticuffs; sometimes, you don’t. You have to pay very close attention to the story moment to determine what you need to do. And you can use the environment to your advantage, especially with high Social Comprehension stats. Maybe break the floor underneath someone, or have him accidentally punch an electric unit. Remember, the key is surviving, not winning. Sometimes you have to lose gracefully, or surrender to an overwhelming force.
Stealth Mechanics are based on your stealth stats. Someone with low stats will be very noisy even when walking, can’t lean against walls or peek around corners, is loud when jumping and has trouble utilizing environmental objects to their advantage (like throwing cans as a distraction). High stealth stats can do pretty much all of that, plus some pretty nifty stealth moves, like mirror an enemy’s movements behind his back, prop oneself up in alcoves above enemies, and “estimate” the cone of vision for security cameras. Controls are similar to cover mechanics, and you have to stay out of enemies’ eyelines and keep quiet. Nothing too complicated here.
Environmental Observation, or Scanning, is based on the character and your stats. I’m not sure if this should be similar to Metroid Prime or Batman: Arkham City, but there should be a mode where you “see” various objects around you that can be used to your advantage. Like fire extinguishers can be used for melee as well as exploding in shooting-based combat, or pipes that can be climbed in stealth or broken for weapons. (Maybe color code them?) This becomes important in later episodes, in worlds where the environment doesn’t make a lick of sense. You have to pay attention to how NPCs use the environment, maybe scan this, and then you can use them later.
Scanning also applies to objects and people that can be used for dialogue purposes, which ties into Social Discussion/Comprehension. Like LA Noire, you can pay attention to physical actions of people you talk to, in order to determine the best dialogue decision. High Social Discussion stats mean more dialogue options – you can play into gray areas instead of yes/no type responses, showcasing a better understanding of the conversation. That will also open up some fun choices, like telling jokes or asides to teammates, or pulling someone to the side and telling them a different piece of information. It’ll allow for giving toasts, praise, or encouragement, or even taunts, threats, mindgames, and screaming matches towards various antagonists. This can be mixed around. If a teammate says something that bothers the person you control, you have a choice to say something about it or keep quiet. Keeping quiet may keep the other person’s morale up, but it will probably lower your own.
High Social Comprehension allows for observations of the person you’re talking to and the surrounding environment to assist in better responses. If you’re told some piece of information, this may alert you that this is probably a lie, based on the tone of voice or facial tic. You may want to respond with anger; however, those high stats will also alert you to the NPCs around you that may be eager to pull a weapon; you then may wish to diffuse the moment cautiously instead.
Sample dialogue (safe situation): Bob and Mary wait at bus station for the next bus to a further point in the level. You control Bob, who is now bitter from events in previous episode.
Mary: Bus taking a while, huh?
Bob: (Low Social Discussion stats give you only two options – a “positive” response or a “negative” response)
- C1: Uh, it’ll be here soon, I guess. (Boosts Mary’s morale, may lower yours.)
- C2: When it comes, it comes. (Lowers Mary’s morale, may raise yours.)
(Medium Social Discussion stats net you some more responses)
- C3: Wonder if everyone always waits this long. (Boosts Mary’s morale, may lower yours.)
- C4: You can see if there’s a schedule somewhere. (Lowers Mary’s morale, may raise yours.)
(High Social Discussion net you all 6 responses)
- C5: Maybe it got lost, like me in your eyes. (Obvious joke, maybe raises both morale.)
- C6: It’ll arrive in another four minutes. (Only available if you scan a bus schedule beforehand; raises morale.)
Or, you could not respond. Might lower both character’s morale, though.
Sample dialogue (tense situation): An antagonist holds up a gun against a NPC’s head in front of Mary. You control Mary. Here, dialogue is timed. You have to respond quicker or things may turn for the worst. (OR they could turn for the better. Again, totally depends on the situation. Morale here mostly depends on what occurs AFTER the scene is over.)
Antagonist: Give me one reason why I shouldn’t kill him.
Mary: (Low discussion stats)
- C1: Because you can’t just kill a living person!
- C2: NOOOOO!
(Medium discussion stats)
- C3: I can give you a hundred good reasons, if you just let me.
- C4: Let him go, take me instead. I know you want to.
(High discussion stats)
- C5: Because you’re better than this.
- C6: If you let him go… I may make it worth your while.
Or, say nothing, and try your hand at subduing the antagonist yourself. This may be almost impossible to do without getting the NPC killed (which lowers morale.)
Climbing and Jumping might be best mixed with Stamina; or, better yet, Stamina is a better reflector of those stats that separate.
Puzzle Solving (may need a better name) is about figuring out how to, well, solve puzzles that are important for progressing in the game. Things like hacking computers, diffusing bombs, restoring electricity – any encounter that usually prompts some kind of mini-game. In this case, if you have low stats in this, the encounter is presented as is – or as a complicated version to the player. Diffusing a bomb, for example, is just a bunch of wires and mechanisms. If your stats are high, however, the encounter is “re-envisioned” as something easier. That bomb is, to the viewpoint of the character, is a simpler task of, let’s say, easy math problems, or a simple pattern. Intelligence helps here. You can use Intelligence to, lets say, observe books or paintings, or how buildings are built or how cars are designed. That way, if said bomb was attached to a car, and you “scanned” a car prototype, it would make solving the bomb puzzle easier. In other words, Intelligence focuses on methods and ways to understand the world you’re in, but doesn’t hinder actual progress – although it might make it easier.
VII. Set Pieces
Everything listed above is all based around Set Pieces. Imagine the cool, cinematic moments from Uncharted 2; now, multiply that by 100.
Set Pieces are climaxes to various episodes, which requires all the skills you developed for your team and all the information you learned about your world as well as quick timing, thinking, reaction, and communication. Set Pieces are high octane moments of shooting, fighting, and stealth. It’s an all-the-cards-on-the-table moment, when buildings falls and things blow up, where enemies are everywhere and a few random objectives stand between you and survival. You have to shoot, talk, sneak, and fight your way to victory.
Example: an entire level took place on a huge airship, only to realize that the airship has a nuclear bomb set to crash land on a large population. The airship is on its way down. You have to fight your way to the teleportation escape pods as the ship burns hotly with set fuses. Pieces fall apart and (OCCASIONAL) QTEs pop up, in order to dodge some pieces and grab onto ledges if and when they fall underneath your feet. You have to diffuse other charges to slow down the decent; and plead with people not to abandon their posts to keep the ship up as long as possible. Even then, you have a choice – do you even bother to save the ship? Have it change course? Try to just save the people on board? Or only your team? Even your squad is conflicted. Do you pull a teammate away from a device he’s trying to fix or let him finish as time ticks away? Everything comes together at this moment. There’s a chance, a REAL chance, people will have to be sacrificed.
Yeah, it’s quite a lot, and it’s completely and utterly theoretical wishful thinking. But I think if a company focused on the core story of a game, and toned down the over-wrought world-building details, the nutso cut scenes, and AVOID FORCED MULTIPLAYER, then this could be doable. A lot of what I mentioned is in place in a ton of other games, so the only thing needed is a universal, direct vision.
Email Interview with Amy Keating Rogers
Posted by kjohnson1585 in Animation, Television, Uncategorized, Writing on July 30, 2012
The cult-popularity of My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic may have its supporters and detractors, but the show itself is sweet and engaging in itself, and that can’t be denied, thanks to the talented writers and animators behind the show. One of the writers, Amy Rogers Keating, was willing to talk to be about MLP as well as Care Bears: Welcome to Care-A-Lot, where she is currently story editor. Be sure to follow her Twitter account here, as well as her Youtube page and the trailer to her documentary “Jason Bateman Think’s I’m Dead”.
Amy will also be at Midwestria, Septemeber 14-16, in Illinois.
TMB: Contrary to most interviews, I’d actually like to start off with Care Bears. You had a varied career in a lot of hand-drawn animation, so is it difficult to slow the “energy” down for a CGI cartoon?
AKR: Hmmm…I’m not sure what you mean by “slow the energy down.” Writing for any kind of animation is the same for me whether it’s hand-drawn, flash, or CGI. However, the writing does differ depending on the audience that it’s being written for. For instance, a preschool show is different than a show for a 6 to 9 year old audience because you have to explain more. With Care Bears and MLP, I know that the audience will grasp ideas without having to repeat or really spell them out.
TMB: I wanted to clarify that “slow down the energy” question. I meant in terms of wackier, more physical-based gags that may stretch character or cartoon physics. For example, in something like “Feeling Pinkie Keen,” Twilight is put through the ringer when trying to find the secret to Pinkie’s “Pinkie Sense.” I don’t imagine that it be as feasible to pile on so many physical gags like that in Care Bears, or most CGI cartoons. I guess my real question was if you had to limit those types of gags and behaviors, and if the change of pace was easier or harder.
AKR: Okay! Now I understand!
I guess I really didn’t think about having to limit myself as far as the cartoon physics because those issues never really came up in the stories. Not that we don’t have plenty of goofy gags and silliness, just not specifically what you’re talking about. Of course, the storyboard artists and animators know better what can be pushed in CGI and can put that humor in when the scripts get to those stages. I’m always amazed at what they pull off!
TMB: How did you decide which of the Care Bears to use as the core group?
AKR: I actually wasn’t part of that decision. When I was brought on as Story Editor, the core Care Bears had already been chosen. The great thing is that with so many Care Bears in the universe, we’re able to have lots of fun cameos!
TMB: Grumpy always was an interesting character to me, regardless of iteration. He seems to be, to put it as best I can, the writers’ way of expressing a certain self-loathing (in the most kid-friendly way possible) of working on a show about overly-friendly bears. Am I in the ball park, or am I way off here?
AKR: Grumpy is great! And once Doug Erholtz started doing his voice, it got even more fun because we saw how far we could push Grumpy and knew that Doug would enhance it even more!
But I fear you are “way off” regarding the whole self-loathing thing. I really love writing for shows that take place in worlds like Care-a-Lot and Equestria. These worlds are full of joy and silliness and songs. Not a bad place to hang out during your work day! As for the Care Bears being “overly-friendly,” I think that is looking at them too simply and too much on the surface. They are much more well-rounded than that. Yes, they are all Care Bears at the core (even Grumpy cares!), but they all have their flaws which make them very interesting and fun to write for. Share has jealousy issues, Harmony can be a bit bossy, and Funshine can be inconsiderate, forgetting that others need to have fun too. In Season One we really got to explore their personalities discovering what made each Care Bear tick.
TMB: Any chance we’ll be seeing the Care Bear Cousins?
AKR: The Care Bear Cousins won’t be appearing in Season One. But who knows about the future?
TMB: Okay, now I’ll ask about My Little Pony. It’s certainly a looser, wackier cartoon than most people expected. Did Lauren Faust and company come to the property with that vibe in mind, or did it develop organically over the course of production?
AKR: Lauren created the show with that vibe in mind. She wanted a fun, non-dumbed down show for girls. Her shorter draft of Ticketmaster had all of that silliness in there. Now, this was certainly built upon by the rest of the production team. But Lauren guided it all and knew what she was going for.
TMB: The explosion of cult popularity behind the show must have been unexpected. How have you been managing so far?
AKR: It is unexpected, though I had experienced a smaller version of this back on Powerpuff Girls. So, when I found out that adults–mainly men–were enjoying MLP: FiM, I wasn’t that shocked.
I’m managing the fandom well. I went to BronyCon and met a lot of fans and everyone was incredibly kind and appreciative. It was fantastic to experience their love for the show first hand. Bronies would break into song, which I found so amazing!
TMB: Although some fans can be overwrought, you have to be proud to produce something that even grown men will admit they enjoy. How do you think this idea proliferated? Do you think this may be the beginning of a change of view about how animation is perceived?
AKR: I am absolutely proud to be part of MLP:FiM. But then, I was proud of it before the show exploded with popularity. When it premiered, I was telling all the moms I know with daughters about this great new version of My Little Pony and was really excited that these girls had such a great show to watch with such strong female characters.
As for how the show proliferated to the adult male fan base, I think these viewers are animation fans to begin with. Since Lauren’s name was attached to the show and she has such a great track record, I’m sure they tuned in just to see what her latest show was. Then, when they saw the awesome designs, the great animation, the compelling characters, the fantastic music, and the strong writing, they got hooked!
I think animation has been gaining more respect for quite awhile. However, the fact that a children’s show is getting this kind of recognition is more unusual, but great!
TMB: Favorite character? How about favorite episode?
AKR: I really love Pinkie Pie. She is so silly and quirky and random. She’s very fun to write for because I can just go to my goofball side.
I enjoyed “A Friend in Deed” a lot because it was a full-on Pinkie episode. Plus there was one big song and lots of little ones and I love getting to write music.
TMB: Is maintaining continuity a main concern for the show? I understand the need for every episode to stand on its own, but how much emphasis is placed on making sure that events and ideas from earlier episodes continue in later episodes?
AKR: In Seasons One and Two, while the show isn’t serialized, we definitely were aware of keeping things consistent as the episodes were written, building upon the world and developing the characters as we went. I read everyone else’s scripts to make sure I knew about any changes and progress.
TMB: What’s next for the Spike and the Main 6?
AKR: Gosh, I have no idea! Because I was busy story editing on Care Bears, I did not write for Season 3. I’m looking forward to watching along with all the Bronies!
Email Interview With Robert Schooley
Posted by kjohnson1585 in Animation, Film, Television, Writing on July 19, 2012
The Penguins of Madagascar is a quietly excellent cartoon: a madcap, zany show that redefined the Madagascar’s cuddly-yet-militaristic team in an over-the-top Brooklyn zoo. Its insular nature made it hard to keep up, but, like Community, rewarded followers with inside jokes, excellent character gags, and nods to past events. Recently, the show finished up their production run, and sooner then later the final episodes will be aired on Nick. [07/19/12 – Edit: Just learned that, today, the show was also nominated for a Primetime Emmy!] Executive producer and writer Robert Schooley took some time out of his schedule to talk about the show, the difference between CGI and traditional animation, and whether the Lunicorns were indeed a My Little Pony parody. Be sure to follow him on Twitter.
TMB: The Penguins of Madagascar seemed to relish in being its own thing instead of hewing too closely to the Madagascar movies. How much of this was intentional from the start? Did Dreamworks or Nickelodeon have reservations in taking the characters in such a different and separate direction?
RS: It was a practical decision. DW didn’t know what the Madagascar sequel stories would be at that point, so the decision was made to feature all of the characters but the four leads and exist in a separate continuity from the features.
TMB: As a followup, what were the challenges, if any, in defining the characters and the show outside of the films?
RS: Skipper was fully defined already, so it was a matter of finding new aspects to the other three to round out the team. Because we were not really related to the movies, we felt pretty comfortable letting everyone develop naturally as we’d invent new comic quirks to have fun with.
TMB: Does the New York setting pose any issues? Since everyone who works on the show is in LA.
RS: Not really. Most of us are from the east coast anyway. I’m sure if we were living there while writing the show more particular real world details might have shown up.
TMB: The director of the first Madagascar film, Tom McGrath, mentioned here that he wanted to avoid “zoo vs. wild” type contentions. Seems like you doubled down on that philosophy. Can you elaborate on it?
RS: It’s such a unique world with it’s own strange logic, I’m not sure the issue really came up much.
TMB: How did ideas for characters and plots come up? It’s impressive how rich and diverse the cast has become in just a few years.
RS: Hardest question to answer. Most ideas just come out of looking to put a character through something. A few stories came out of specifics to the zoo setting, like “Snooze at the Zoo” or webcam, but most were just coming up with funny ways to put characters in conflict with each other, nature or the world.
TMB: While I wouldn’t say the show had a “story arc,” it seems to have a very loose style that allows events, stories, and characters to be called back to, referenced, and revisited. Was there a fear about that being alienating to new audiences?
RS: Always a risk and probably something the network would rather we didn’t do, but all the shows we produce have a rough internal continuity. We like to reward fans who watch every episode. And in this DVR age it’s not hard to do.
TMB: I would like to talk about the animation for a moment. We’ve come a long way since Reboot. How challenging is it to make strong, cartoony movements (squash and stretch, smears and blurs, etc.) via CGI?
RS: We have really great animators in our studios working off very strong board poses. It amuses me when people confuse rendering (i.e. detailed fur) to character animation. On a TV budget and schedule we can’t do the same lush rendering as a feature, but I think we do get every ounce of subtlety and personality out of these characters. We are constantly amazed by the little extra touches the teams in India and New Zealand add to the acting.
TMB: Which do you prefer, traditional or computers?
RS: Apples and oranges. I like both. Kim Possible was a great looking show and I’d do that style again in a minute. A big advantage to traditional is that you can create a much bigger world, since every set and guest character doesn’t have to be laboriously built. And it can be a more stylish look, ideally. But there’s also a great feel of spacial reality in CG that lends itself to the more sitcom sorts of stories that we do on this show, and yet, thanks to the process that’s been refined here at Nick, with genuine cartoon snap and timing that is genuinely fun to watch.
TMB: How did you get into the TV animation business? How’d you get tagged as executive producer of this show in particular?
RS: Started in the mailroom at DIC, a busy studio in the 80’s. Started pitching stories to their shows, got hired on staff. Eventually drafted to Disney, worked our way up to exec producer there. We were recruited to run Penguins after they had already done a first version of a pilot that we came in to rework.
TMB: Favorite character? Favorite episode?
RS: Can’t really pick a favorite character. Honestly they’re all fun to write. I think Skipper is pretty special because Tom created him and can add little touches and ad libs in the performance that surprise and delight us. But I think everybody has added unique touches to their characters. Danny’s King Julien is a constant exploration of how far you can push an ego. I love when Jeff gets to play Kowalski as unexpectedly emotionally fragile. Or when John decided Rico should sing like Michael McDonald. And nothing made me laugh more than James when Private got angry at everybody.
Favorite episode may be “The Penguin Who Loved Me” because it’s the final Blowhole episode and it pays off a lot of running gags from the series. It may end up being the last to air.
TMB: Now that production is finished on the show, what’s next for you and the Penguins? Rumor has it that there may be a movie in the works.
RS: There is a Penguins movie in production at DW, but at this time it’s unrelated to the series. That could always change though, I guess. We, and most of the staff and some of the cast are deep into the next series Monsters vs. Aliens.
TMB: Final question: Are the Lunacorns really the show’s jab at the My Little Pony fandom?
RS: One man’s jab is another’s homage.