Jump to content

Leadwerks interviews Frictional Games co-founder Thomas Grip

Josh

4,041 views

Frictional Games is the developer of puzzle horror games like Penumbra and the new Amnesia: The Dark Descent. We sat down with Frictional Games co-founder Thomas Grip to learn more about their development process.

 

Josh: I'm a big fan of the Penumbra series. What can we look forward to in Amnesia: The Dark Descent?

 

Thomas Grip: There is a lot to of new stuff in the game. First of all the game is a more streamlined experience both in terms of general gameplay and interaction. For the gameplay we have made sure that the focus is always on atmosphere and story, and made sure that the player is never stuck at a puzzle for too long and stuff like that. One of the ways we do this is to allow multiple solutions so it always feels intuitive to the player.

 

In terms of interaction, it is much easier to interact now. In Penumbra it could be a pain to open doors at times because you needed to click on the right spot and so on. In Amnesia all that is fixed and it is now possible to easily slam shut a door in the face of an enemy and things like that.

 

There is also a new insanity system, a fresh environment, and new story.

 

blogentry-1-006262200 1284653903_thumb.jpg

Josh: Can you talk about the process of developing an idea and turning it into a full-fledged game? Do you start with a design document or just start writing code? How closely does your final game resemble what you originally imagined?

 

Thomas Grip: This time we had a very long iteration period where we tested out various ideas. We actually first had a bite-sized horror design inspired by Super Mario. It was intended to have small self-contained levels and to be played in shorter bursts. It did not fall out too well and we tried tons of stuff before settling where the final game is.

 

In the early iterations we started out with a "fun" mechanic and tried to base a game on that, but as I said, it did not turn out good. Instead we started focusing on the themes and general feel of the game. Then we started building minimal mechanics to support that. To do this we took a lot from Penumbra, as we knew how it worked, and refined it.

 

Once we had the general feel going 1/3 or so is drawn up on paper and we started making maps based on that, then as maps are made we continue to design the remaining 2/3 on paper taking cues from the maps being built. These written paper designs are often very close to the full game and that is a way for us to be able to plan ahead very accurately. Early on we knew around 90% of the assets that we needed, which is great when outsourcing. Then in the final steps the maps get polished and we play them over and over and try to build up the feel we are after. If something does not work out, we often scrap it instead of rebuilding it.

 

blogentry-1-001935600 1284653901_thumb.jpg

Josh: Towards the end of the first Penumbra game, you communicated with a major character over an intercom system. The character never actually appeared on screen, but the emotional connection was established using voice acting. This struck me as a good design decision, because you were able to eliminate all the trouble of making an animated character speak in a convincing cut scene, without detracting from the player's experience. Are there any other examples like that where you made design decisions that helped streamline production, so you could focus on the core gameplay?

 

Thomas Grip: There is a lot of that stuff in Amnesia. For example, there is one character without a lower jaw, which removed the need to do lip-sync. When it comes to visions we only use sound (without models, like in System Shock 2), which in turn also gives the game a more spooky feel. I think having these kinds of constraints also forces you to use your imagination more and not just follow the design of other games. Although it is a bit annoying not being able to do certain stuff, it often turns out positive for us.

 

blogentry-1-047489600 1284653897_thumb.jpg

Josh: What's next for Frictional Games?

 

Thomas Grip: Rest! And tech support... And then we have to see how sales and so go! We have an interesting idea we would like to pursue, but it depends a bit on how we do financially.

 

 

Check out Amnesia: The Dark Descent for creepy thrills and inspiring game design.



4 Comments


Recommended Comments

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Add a comment...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Blog Entries

    • By Josh in Josh's Dev Blog 2
      I started to implement quads for tessellation, and at that point the shader system reached the point of being unmanageable. Rendering an object to a shadow map and to a color buffer are two different processes that require two different shaders. Turbo introduces an early Z-pass which can use another shader, and if variance shadow maps are not in use this can be a different shader from the shadow shader. Rendering with tessellation requires another set of shaders, with one different set for each primitive type (isolines, triangles, and quads). And then each one of these needs a masked and opaque option, if alpha discard is enabled.
      All in all, there are currently 48 different shaders a material could use based on what is currently being drawn. This is unmanageable.
      To handle this I am introducing the concept of a "shader family". This is a JSON file that lists all possible permutations of a shader. Instead of setting lots of different shaders in a material, you just set the shader family one:
      shaderFamily: "PBR.json" Or in code:
      material->SetShaderFamily(LoadShaderFamily("PBR.json")); The shader family file is a big JSON structure that contains all the different shader modules for each different rendering configuration: Here are the partial contents of my PBR.json file:
      { "turboShaderFamily" : { "OPAQUE": { "default": { "base": { "vertex": "Shaders/PBR.vert.spv", "fragment": "Shaders/PBR.frag.spv" }, "depthPass": { "vertex": "Shaders/Depthpass.vert.spv" }, "shadow": { "vertex": "Shaders/Shadow.vert.spv" } }, "isolines": { "base": { "vertex": "Shaders/PBR_Tess.vert.spv", "tessellationControl": "Shaders/Isolines.tesc.spv", "tessellationEvaluation": "Shaders/Isolines.tese.spv", "fragment": "Shaders/PBR_Tess.frag.spv" }, "shadow": { "vertex": "Shaders/DepthPass_Tess.vert.spv", "tessellationControl": "Shaders/DepthPass_Isolines.tesc.spv", "tessellationEvaluation": "Shaders/DepthPass_Isolines.tese.spv" }, "depthPass": { "vertex": "Shaders/DepthPass_Tess.vert.spv", "tessellationControl": "DepthPass_Isolines.tesc.spv", "tessellationEvaluation": "DepthPass_Isolines.tese.spv" } }, "triangles": { "base": { "vertex": "Shaders/PBR_Tess.vert.spv", "tessellationControl": "Shaders/Triangles.tesc.spv", "tessellationEvaluation": "Shaders/Triangles.tese.spv", "fragment": "Shaders/PBR_Tess.frag.spv" }, "shadow": { "vertex": "Shaders/DepthPass_Tess.vert.spv", "tessellationControl": "Shaders/DepthPass_Triangles.tesc.spv", "tessellationEvaluation": "Shaders/DepthPass_Triangles.tese.spv" }, "depthPass": { "vertex": "Shaders/DepthPass_Tess.vert.spv", "tessellationControl": "DepthPass_Triangles.tesc.spv", "tessellationEvaluation": "DepthPass_Triangles.tese.spv" } }, "quads": { "base": { "vertex": "Shaders/PBR_Tess.vert.spv", "tessellationControl": "Shaders/Quads.tesc.spv", "tessellationEvaluation": "Shaders/Quads.tese.spv", "fragment": "Shaders/PBR_Tess.frag.spv" }, "shadow": { "vertex": "Shaders/DepthPass_Tess.vert.spv", "tessellationControl": "Shaders/DepthPass_Quads.tesc.spv", "tessellationEvaluation": "Shaders/DepthPass_Quads.tese.spv" }, "depthPass": { "vertex": "Shaders/DepthPass_Tess.vert.spv", "tessellationControl": "DepthPass_Quads.tesc.spv", "tessellationEvaluation": "DepthPass_Quads.tese.spv" } } } } } A shader family file can indicate a root to inherit values from. The Blinn-Phong shader family pulls settings from the PBR file and just switches some of the fragment shader values.
      { "turboShaderFamily" : { "root": "PBR.json", "OPAQUE": { "default": { "base": { "fragment": "Shaders/Blinn-Phong.frag.spv" } }, "isolines": { "base": { "fragment": "Shaders/Blinn-Phong_Tess.frag.spv" } }, "triangles": { "base": { "fragment": "Shaders/Blinn-Phong_Tess.frag.spv" } }, "quads": { "base": { "fragment": "Shaders/Blinn-Phong_Tess.frag.spv" } } } } } If you want to implement a custom shader, this is more work because you have to define all your changes for each possible shader variation. But once that is done, you have a new shader that will work with all of these different settings, which in the end is easier. I considered making a more complex inheritance / cascading schema but I think eliminating ambiguity is the most important goal in this and that should override any concern about the verbosity of these files. After all, I only plan on providing a couple of these files and you aren't going to need any more unless you are doing a lot of custom shaders. And if you are, this is the best solution for you anyways.
      Consequently, the baseShader, depthShader, etc. values in the material file definition are going away. Leadwerks .mat files will always use the Blinn-Phong shader family, and there is no way to change this without creating a material file in the new JSON material format.
      The shader class is no longer derived from the Asset class because it doesn't correspond to a single file. Instead, it is just a dumb container. A ShaderModule class derived from the Asset class has been added, and this does correspond with a single .spv file. But you, the user, won't really need to deal with any of this.
      The result of this is that one material will work with tessellation enabled or disabled, quad, triangle, or line meshes, and animated meshes. I also added an optional parameter in the CreatePlane(), CreateBox(), and CreateQuadSphere() commands that will create these primitives out of quads instead of triangles. The main reason for supporting quad meshes is that the tessellation is cleaner when quads are used. (Note that Vulkan still displays quads in wireframe mode as if they are triangles. I think the renderer probably converts them to normal triangles after the tessellation stage.)


      I also was able to implement PN Quads, which is a quad version of the Bezier curve that PN Triangles add to tessellation.



      Basically all the complexity is being packed into the shader family file so that these decisions only have to be made once instead of thousands of times for each different material.
    • By Josh in Josh's Dev Blog 0
      I'm back from I/ITSEC. This conference is basically like the military's version of GDC. VR applications built with Leadwerks took up about half of Northrop Grumman's booth. There were many interesting discussions about new technology and I received a very warm reception. I feel very positive about our new technology going forward.

      I am currently reworking the text field widget script to work with our persistent 2D objects. This is long and boring but needs to be done. Not much else to say right now.
    • By Josh in Josh's Dev Blog 4
      Here are some screenshots showing more complex interface items scaled at different resolutions. First, here is the interface at 100% scaling:

      And here is the same interface at the same screen resolution, with the DPI scaling turned up to 150%:

      The code to control this is sort of complex, and I don't care. GUI resolution independence is a complicated thing, so the goal should be to create a system that does what it is supposed to do reliably, not to make complicated things simpler at the expense of functionality.
      function widget:Draw(x,y,width,height) local scale = self.gui:GetScale() self.primitives[1].size = iVec2(self.size.x, self.size.y - self.tabsize.y * scale) self.primitives[2].size = iVec2(self.size.x, self.size.y - self.tabsize.y * scale) --Tabs local n local tabpos = 0 for n = 1, #self.items do local tw = self:TabWidth(n) * scale if n * 3 > #self.primitives - 2 then self:AddRect(iVec2(tabpos,0), iVec2(tw, self.tabsize.y * scale), self.bordercolor, false, self.itemcornerradius * scale) self:AddRect(iVec2(tabpos+1,1), iVec2(tw, self.tabsize.y * scale) - iVec2(2 * scale,-1 * scale), self.backgroundcolor, false, self.itemcornerradius * scale) self:AddTextRect(self.items[n].text, iVec2(tabpos,0), iVec2(tw, self.tabsize.y*scale), self.textcolor, TEXT_CENTER + TEXT_MIDDLE) end if self:SelectedItem() == n then self.primitives[2 + (n - 1) * 3 + 1].position = iVec2(tabpos, 0) self.primitives[2 + (n - 1) * 3 + 1].size = iVec2(tw, self.tabsize.y * scale) + iVec2(0,2) self.primitives[2 + (n - 1) * 3 + 2].position = iVec2(tabpos + 1, 1) self.primitives[2 + (n - 1) * 3 + 2].color = self.selectedtabcolor self.primitives[2 + (n - 1) * 3 + 2].size = iVec2(tw, self.tabsize.y * scale) - iVec2(2,-1) self.primitives[2 + (n - 1) * 3 + 3].color = self.hoveredtextcolor self.primitives[2 + (n - 1) * 3 + 1].position = iVec2(tabpos,0) self.primitives[2 + (n - 1) * 3 + 2].position = iVec2(tabpos + 1, 1) self.primitives[2 + (n - 1) * 3 + 3].position = iVec2(tabpos,0) else self.primitives[2 + (n - 1) * 3 + 1].size = iVec2(tw, self.tabsize.y * scale) self.primitives[2 + (n - 1) * 3 + 2].color = self.tabcolor self.primitives[2 + (n - 1) * 3 + 2].size = iVec2(tw, self.tabsize.y * scale) - iVec2(2,2) if n == self.hovereditem then self.primitives[2 + (n - 1) * 3 + 3].color = self.hoveredtextcolor else self.primitives[2 + (n - 1) * 3 + 3].color = self.textcolor end self.primitives[2 + (n - 1) * 3 + 1].position = iVec2(tabpos,2) self.primitives[2 + (n - 1) * 3 + 2].position = iVec2(tabpos + 1, 3) self.primitives[2 + (n - 1) * 3 + 3].position = iVec2(tabpos,2) end self.primitives[2 + (n - 1) * 3 + 3].text = self.items[n].text tabpos = tabpos + tw - 2 end end  
×
×
  • Create New...