Feb 23, 2025
I learned about the framework of lenses in Jesse Schell's Art of Game Design. Schell tells us to "view your game from as many perspectives as possible. I refer to these perspectives as lenses, because each one is a way of viewing your design. They are not blueprints or recipes, but tools for examining your design."
Lenses that work for game writing often work for non-interactive writing. Maybe I hang out with too many SFF authors but I find there's a lot of overlap particularly with genre writing. I reach for my lenses constantly to figure out the logic behind a gut feeling: something feels off; what is it?
None of these came to me in a moment of heavenly inspiration; I stole them from friends/mentors/books or arrived at them in discussion.
THE PROBLEMS BUCKET: What gets problematized in your story? Which is to say, what goes in your bucket of problems, and what doesn't? Be deliberate and consistent about this. Inconsistency always jumps out to me. For example: a contemporary fairy tale retelling that isn't sure whether monarchy is something to be interrogated or not, and so ends up being muddled and unsatisfying. (A friend pointed out that interpersonal relationships should basically always be in the problems bucket but sometimes aren't. I hadn't thought of using this lens that way but it's smart!)
EMOTIONAL = MECHANICAL. If you have a villain who face-turns (or an NPC you want players to like) they can't just cheer on the heroes, they have to provide some missing piece of the puzzle to be satisfying. See also: shounen fights where one guy punches better because his friends believe in him. Can the emotional/"pure writing" side of a beat resonate with what is happening mechanically/in terms of player experience? It probably (but not always!) should.
SIDE CHARACTERS ARE A PRISM: With limited time/space, a way to make a text feel richer is for every character to say something about your main character, who should say something about your work as a whole. What thematic questions does your MC pose? How do side characters reflect those questions?
PUNCHLINE PLACEMENT: Where in your line/chapter/mission/cutscene is the most important piece of information? Play with that for pacing/tension/surprise. "And his name was… DRACULA!" feels more explosive than "And Dracula… was his NAME!" It gets repetitive if you only ever place your bomb at the final beat. Maybe a script feels weirdly paced because your bomb is always in the same position within a line (or chapter, or mission, or cutscene...).
EFFICIENCY: How many things is your line doing? Can it do more? Things a line can do (non-exhaustive list): reveal something about the world or a character; further the plot; tell the player where to go; explain a UI interaction. If a line or scene drags maybe it's not doing enough to earn its keep.
PLAYER ERGONOMICS: How comfortable are players in this story moment? How good does it feel to exist around this character? How uncomfortable can you afford to make your players? A lot of popular villains are popular because they have good player ergonomics, and selling a face turn relies on it.
PERSONALIZATION: Even in a linear story, is there a way to make the game respond to some player choice—their action, their state, their inventory? A couple small things here make a big impact.
SURPRISE THAT SURPRISES: Not only a surprise in terms of what's there, but a surprise in terms of what is possible. Something that blows open the expectation of what can even happen in a game/activity like this. It can create awe. Psycho Mantis reading your save data is personalization + a surprise that surprises; to me these two lenses are often intertwined.
STATUS: Who's got the upper hand in the current situation? Does it change? Is it surprising? If a scene feels like it doesn't go anywhere, it might be that the same person's got the upper hand the whole way through: nobody's status shifts. (Added May 4, 2025)
FANDOM: Who's the blorbo? Where's the toxic yuri? If you look at your work, can you imagine fanworks it could spawn? I'm cautious with this; it's useful but IMO shouldn't be a primary lens. Fandom shorthand can help judge/juice dynamics, but if it's the only tool used, you'll end up with collections of shorthand instead of full characters. We do need more whump in games tho.
AUDIENCE EXPERT: Someone in the audience will know more about the thing you're writing about than you. There's no way to avoid this. What is avoidable is embarrassment. Write in a way that would leave you comfortable if an expert showed up at your door with a screencap and a raised eyebrow.
HYPE MOMENTS AND AURA: Or: writing for the trailer. This is an addition to the lens of efficiency, coming in late because it took me a while to realize how important it is. One thing your writing can do, and should do at points, is sound cool. Not everywhere or all the time, but once in a while. Give a gift to your studio's trailer editors and fandom gif set makers. (Added June 8, 2025)
WHOLE BODY SENSATION: It's easy to default to writing as though people are a pair of eyes and hands moving through space, but both a character and the space they move through feel more real the more senses you draw on. If your character's in a sewer level, are their socks wet? What's it smell like? Do they have to hunch over, and is that hurting their back? I use this mainly for prose, but it's always worth thinking about. (Added November 20, 2025)