This could have been an incredibly different story

After watching a lot of the special features and extras in the Pixar DVDs, I have a strange feeling that Pixar uses something akin to “Agile Development” methodology in their storytelling.

In the “Incredibles” deleted scenes, the villain, “Syndrome”, actually makes an appearance at the start of the movie while Violet is just a little baby.  He invades the home of Mr. and Mrs. Incredible while they are still a young couple. This scene was supposed to be the prelude to the story introducing the characters and their super powers.  It included a fully animated storyboard with sounds and voices. The dialog of Syndrome breaking into the home and capturing the family even included a mention that there was a prohibition on “supers” marrying and having children.

The final movie did not include any of this. In fact, if this was the original scene for the movie, it would have radically altered the entire story, plot trajectory, theme and mood to the narrative. This wasn’t a “deleted scene” so much as it was a complete rewrite of the entire story.  In fact, in some of the “Behind the Scenes” dialog, Syndrome was not even considered the main antagonist of the plot.  He was supposed to just be a random villain that allows the characters to display their super powers.

What Pixar appears to do is that they storyboard, voice and create the entire movie more than once and get audience feedback. This allows the storytellers the ability to refine the story ideas over and over again – scrapping bad ones, changing scene orders, and completely rewriting the story if need be. It is the “Agile Development” method of software taken to film – quick iterations, and lots of opportunities for feedback loops.

Linguini was voiced by Lou Ramano, Art and Production Design

In fact, that is how the voices for Linguini and Emile were discovered for “Ratatouille” – they were Pixar staff who did the voice work for these storyboard sessions and fit the characters so well, they kept them for the final production.

Keep in mind, this is merely conjecture from viewing a lot of “Behind the Scenes” features on the DVDs and on the Internet for the latest Pixar movies. But at the same time, I cannot help but think that a massive amount of research was done to perfect the movies that Pixar produces.

Both “Ratatouille” and “Up” stunned me in their storytelling craft. But if you attempt to describe to someone what these two stories are about, they would be incredulous to believe that someone could actually tell a good story from such a ridiculous plot premise.

It is almost as if someone at Pixar is taking bets that using their storytelling method, they can tell a good story from anything that you can throw at them: from a mouse who wants to learn how to cook in France, to an old man who strings his house up on helium balloons and wants to fly to South America.

With so much story refinement done up-front with tons of research done on audience reaction, I think that it would be nigh impossible for Pixar to make a bad movie. At worse, you won’t get a Pixar movie next year because they are still iterating the kinks out of the current story they are developing, but you will never get a bad one.

"Up" was probably created by a random plot generator

Shigeru Miyamoto - He who needs no introduction

How Nintendo creates fun and lasting video games is not really a big secret.  It’s hidden in plain sight.  A lot of people like focusing on the “genius” of Shigeru Miyamoto as a game designer – maybe even as some kind of gaming “god” -  but very few focus on his method.

From an article reporting the development methods of Nintendo at GDC ‘09:

[Miyamoto] does a prototype phase for each game that has terrible graphics. We got to see the prototype for Wii Boxing, which had just colored boxes for graphics. This prototype phase has only very few team members (maybe 2 or 3) and ONLY focuses on the interaction. “Find the fun.” There is a lot of trial and error as they look for this fun.

And from an interview from Clinton Keith of High Moon Studios’ (in an article on Lost Garden) nearly 2 years ago:

“If you want someone to fail, you want them to fail fast, before they spend a lot of money. That’s how Nintendo was. When I was working on the Dream Team [at Angel Studios], they wanted us to do this DNA-based driving game called Buggy Boogie. You had these vehicles that would eat other vehicles and adopt their powers and morph. It was really cool. But they would sign three month contracts, and Miyamoto himself would say that he did not want any documents. He would just say, “Find the fun, and I’ll be back in three months to take a look at what you have.”

We went through about three iterations of that. We busted our hump trying different things, but at the end of it, he kept coming back and saying that it wasn’t there, and it wasn’t fun. We were a new company that didn’t know how to make games. After about six or nine months, he came back and said, “You guys have really worked hard, and we see the progress, but we’re not seeing the product. But another opportunity has come up for a fantasy golf game, so why don’t you guys work on that? In three months, we’ll be back. Show us a golf game.”

So rather than getting pissed off at us and canceling the contract after two years and millions of dollars, they spent just a tiny fraction of that with a small team and said, “Well, it was just a bad idea.” It maintained the relationship with them, so we could go off and do something else.

Small teams?  Iterative Development and Feedback Loops?  Rapid Prototyping?  This is all about Agile Development.

How many development teams start off with a huge product idea with massive story ideas and gimmick gameplay, then hit the ground running with full force teams, massive design documents, only to find out two years later when the game is in testing and about to go gold that the game isn’t even fun?

Bowser and Peach

Nintendo does the opposite.  It spends the most amount of time on the prototyping stage to “find the fun.”  Once they find a fun game mechanic that hits a certain critical threshold, that is when Nintendo leverages the full might of its development army to add content, graphics and tons of spit polish.  The story is built around the game, not the other way around.

That is why in many Nintendo games, you don’t really see the story unless you open the manual.  The game functions even without the story or an explanation on why mushrooms make Mario big or why the princess was captured by an evil spikey turtle.  It’s just FUN!

It’s all about focusing on gameplay before glitz.  Rapid prototyping, practice and feedback.

Two weeks after the release of Strike Eagle, I’m seriously raking in the dough:

Earnings from Strike Eagle

Now granted, I have no network.  I am a virtual unknown coming into the Flash Game Development field, and until the contest results come in and I place, I’m virtually no one.  My rank at NewGrounds was a little above average and same with Kongregate.  So with approximately 30,000 ad impressions, I’ve made close to $20.  If I somehow break 3,000,000 impressions, I make $2000.  But only the best games with the highest replay value ever get that high.  So this is not a viable way to make a living or start a gaming revolution.

Several people have taken me aside and said that if I put the game up on Flash Game License, I would have easily gotten $1500 for the game.  Which again means that I still have a long way to go to get effective games done.  I put in over 120 hours into “Strike Eagle”, and if you divide it up into an hourly rate, is not very high.  I actually make more money doing freelance web programming than I do making Flash games at that rate.

Urbansquall recently posted about his business model with how he makes money for his Flash Game Development company.  And oddly enough, he also states the same thing.  He makes the majority of his money in Licensing and in Contracting – not in advertising.

I think that for my next game, I will try licensing the game I create rather than going for a contest.  As much as I think this contest experience on MochiAds was great and a giant motivator to get me moving and especially to finish a game, waiting for the contest result and the uncertainty of knowing if all the hours you put in are going to be worth your time is very frustrating.  Worse still, since your game is already out there, you can’t go back and license it.

So I may have to reneg on the Jennifer Ann contest.  It is a noble venture, but I currently have a small freelancing job I have to complete, which I will document here on my blog to show the agile software development process for an overseas client.  By the time I complete this job, I will have no time to finish for Jennifer Ann.  But I will seriously consider it for next year.

For now, I will let a possible sequel to Strike Eagle sizzle on my mind and I will document and finish my small freelancing project using Windows Presentation Foundation (WPF).