游戏邦在:
杂志专栏:
gamerboom.com订阅到鲜果订阅到抓虾google reader订阅到有道订阅到QQ邮箱订阅到帮看

Games.com:沉没成本悖论之《FarmVille》毫无趣味性

发布时间:2011-04-01 10:34:51 Tags:,,,

游戏邦注:本文作者为Games.com的撰稿人Tami Baribeau,他在文章驳斥了《FarmVille》基于沉没成本经济学理论设计,毫无趣味性可言的观点。

YouAreNotSoSmart.com的博客作者认为,《FarmVille》所取得的辉煌成就和游戏的趣味性毫无关系。Zynga农场巨作取得的成就得归功于所谓的沉没成本(Sunk Cost)经济学理论。

reduce-project-costs

reduce-project-costs

游戏邦发现,沉没成本是基于这样一个概念:人们对于自己失去的比得到的有更强烈的情感认知。希望挽回失去东西的强烈欲望会让人们做出反常的举动,例如,付费购买Farm Cash的虚拟货币,或者请求朋友帮忙收割庄稼。

《FarmVille》利用人们讨厌失去以及沉没成本的相关观念设置游戏功能。游戏鼓励玩家开拓大片撒满种子的土地,建造房子,种植果树,然后就可以离开游戏做自己想做的事。但玩家知道庄稼会枯萎,果树会开花结果,房子还有待修整,这些都会促使玩家回到游戏中。玩家不希望白白浪费自己所投入的时间。当然玩家可以通过花钱来阻止庄稼遭遇不幸。

《FarmVille》玩家深陷沉没成本的泥潭,他们无法挽回自己所花的时间或者金钱,但游戏邦发现他们还是会继续体验游戏,以避免损失之痛,出现白白蒙受损失的感觉。

当然,这已经不是第一次有言论认为玩家对于游戏的热爱是一种心理成瘾性,呼吁玩家应该摒弃游戏。但是,上述文章忽略的是,原始游戏设计即便是基于所谓的经济学理论,还是可以具备趣味性。Tami Baribeau表示,他玩《FarmVille》,并不是因为他喜欢照料奶牛和庄稼,希望避免损失或者想把流失的时间补回来。而是因为他喜欢装饰农场,喜欢游戏的收集体验。其他玩家喜欢《FarmVille》的原因可能大不相同。

沉没成本也许可以说明为什么《FarmVille》发展如此迅速,或者为什么它能够成为社交游戏领域获利丰厚的作品。但Tami Baribeau认为,“由于《FarmVille》是基于X或者Y,所以它毫无趣味可言”之类的言论完全有失公平。游戏邦发现,《FarmVille》拥有成千上万的玩家,而他们喜欢游戏的原因各不相同。Tami Baribeau并不认为游戏利用了他的心理感受,他是真的喜欢用干草堆装饰农场。(本文为游戏邦/gamerboom.com编译,转载请注明来源:游戏邦)

Sunk cost fallacy: Economics claims FarmVille isn’t fun

According to a blogger at YouAreNotSoSmart.com, FarmVille’s mindblowing success has absolutely nothing to do with the game actually being fun. Zynga’s farming titan owes all of its success to a little economic theory called Sunk Cost.

Sunk cost is based on the idea that people have stronger emotional ties to things they have lost (including intangible things such as time) than they do to things they have gained. It also claims that the psychological drive to get back things that you have lost will cause you to do some pretty wacky things. Such as pay for a virtual currency named Farm Cash. Or beg your friends to help your revive your crops.

FarmVille uses the ideas of loss aversion and sunk cost to drive many of its features. The game encourages players to plant a large farm full of seeds that take time to grow, start building structures, and plant some trees, and then sends you away to enjoy your life (or another game). It’s the fact that you know your crops will wither, that your trees will be blossoming and ready for harvest, that your structures are waiting to be completed, that makes you want to come back. You don’t want to lose out on your time investment (even though you can’t get that time back). And of course, you can pay your precious real life cash to prevent bad things from happening to your crops.

Farmville players are mired in a pit of sunk costs. They can never get back the time or the money they’ve spent, but they keep playing to avoid feeling the pain of loss and the ugly sensation waste creates.Of course, this isn’t the first time we’ve heard someone trying to completely dismiss our love of the game as a psychological addiction. However, what this article fails to recognize is that the game can still be fun despite a known economic theory driving much of the original game’s design. I don’t personally play FarmVille because I want to tend my cows and my crops and prevent losses or get back time that I’ve already spent. I play it because I like to decorate my farm. I like the collection aspect of the game. And other players enjoy FarmVille for completely different reasons.

Sunk cost may explain why FarmVille grew so fast, or why it continues to be a prime money maker in the social games space. But in my humble opinion, blanket statements such as “FarmVille isn’t fun based on X fact or Y fact” are completely unjustified. Millions and millions of players enjoy FarmVille for a variety of reasons. Not every gamer is the same. I certainly don’t feel like the game is exploiting my psychology, I just like making stupid decorations out of damn haybales.(Source:Games.com)


上一篇:

下一篇: