作者：Soren Johnson

设计师在项目之初需要做的最重要的选择之一是决定制作回合游戏还是即时游戏。每种风格的游戏机制都有各自的优点和缺点。虽然回合游戏更注重战略性并且更加透明，但是对那些习惯于动作游戏的玩家来说显得有点枯燥。即时游戏更逼真并且更适合于多人游戏，但是却很容易让那些跟不上节奏的新玩家感到不知所措。

当然，回合游戏直接发展自电子游戏的先驱——传统桌游。事实上，喜欢回合游戏的玩家也会喜欢桌游和卡片游戏。即时游戏（游戏邦注：包括运动类的游戏）是随着电脑的发明而面世的。《超级马里奥兄弟》、《军团要塞》、《FIFA》和《吃豆人》等经典游戏也只能以即时游戏的形式呈现。

但是，有些游戏可以同时采用这两种模式，每种模式都有自己的一整套做法。比如roguelike式地下城游戏就被同时制成回合和即时游戏。诸如《NetHack》之类的早期版本完全是回合制的，只有玩家做出动作之后游戏中的时钟才会前进。暴雪作品《暗黑破坏神》将同样的探索和掠夺原则融入到即时的环境中，创造出战略性较少却更能够触动心灵并足以令人上瘾的游戏体验。而且，移除回合系统中的等待时间，设计师可以也可以开发出多人模式。

但是，《暗黑破坏神》并没有产生诸如《Pokemon Mystery Dungeon》或《Shiren the Wanderer》等回合制roguelike游戏那种流行度，它们依然散发着策略游戏的魅力。因而，决定回合还是即时的问题并不在于哪个系统更好或者更差，而在于哪种系统更适合设计师想要制作的游戏。

游戏内容的多寡

观察游戏的一种简单方法便是调查玩家需要掌握多少游戏系统和元素才会觉得在游戏中游刃有余。比如，典型的射击游戏中有10种武器，即时战略游戏中每方可能有15种单位，角色扮演游戏中或许有20种可以使用的咒语。游戏呈现出的大量新概念和选择可能会吓到新玩家，即时游戏中的时间压力也只会让这种学习过程变得更具挑战性。

Civilization-IV(from fiberdownload.com)

在首次构建《文明》的原型时，Sid Meier最初将游戏构建为即时模型。他从Will Wright的《模拟城市》中获得了灵感，尝试将这种概念扩大到以世界为基础。但是，他很快发现玩家被游戏中需要学习的大量新游戏系统弄得不知所措。毕竟，《模拟城市》中没有外交，没有贸易，没有战斗，没有科研，也没有疯狂的野蛮人。因而，他改变了初衷，将原型重新构建为回合游戏。

设计师必须时刻记住，每款游戏都只能拥有固定数量的内容，否者便会损害到游戏中心机制的体验。没有了时间压力，玩家可以在回合游戏中自行调整学习曲线。资深玩家仍然可以加快游戏进程，但新玩家有了足够的时间细心观察游戏界面来考虑下一步的移动。

因而，回合游戏的易用性通常都比即时游戏好。这也正是为何许多最为流行的休闲游戏都采用回合制的原因，比如PopCap的热门游戏《宝石迷阵》和《Peggle》。

就其核心而言，回合游戏和即时游戏有着不同的强度。举个例子，就是游戏体验应该是确定性还是偶然性这个问题。如果属于前者，那么在游戏中成功与否取决于是否知道某种动作后的结果。比如在《Puzzle Quest》中，玩家需要知道何时一行4个的颅骨会消失，其他颅骨会以某种特定的方式落下，这样就可以组成一列新的红宝石。游戏中含有某些运气成分（游戏邦注：比如块状物会不经意从顶上落下）并不意味着玩家就不会在脑中构思策略。这种连续性的游戏玩法是回合游戏的核心。

反之，偶然性正是即时游戏的强势所在。当玩家首次在《军团要塞2》中看到重机枪手和医务兵的组合时时，他们知道这些单位可能陷入困境，但是事件的后果很难预测。可能会有狙击手杀死医务兵，爆炸可能将重机枪手从平台上炸下，也可能有间谍正尾随着他们。发生在地图另一侧的事情可能会让玩家迅速放弃某一侧的区域。即时游戏的偶然性很强，因为在这种即时状况下玩家无法对敌人下一步的行动进行预测。

多人游戏和单人游戏

回合游戏和即时游戏强度的不同还在于，游戏体验注重的是多人游戏还是单人游戏。通常来说，多人游戏比较适合即时游戏，而回合游戏会更偏重于单人游戏。像《超级大战争》和《文明》之类的回合游戏只能吸引少部分硬核多人游戏玩家。同时，即时游戏也面临相同的问题，诸如《命令与征服》和《帝国时代》之类的游戏也都是因它们的多人模式而流行。

存在这种差异的原因很简单，等待其他玩家完成回合很无趣，所以那些寻找同步多人游戏体验的设计师总是偏向于使用即时模式。但是，由于并没有其他玩家正在等待，所有纯单人游戏的设计师就会选择使用回合制元素，以增加游戏的战略性和趣味性。比如，单人游戏《辐射3》允许玩家暂停即时战斗，进入V.A.T.S.模式来制定瞄准敌人身体哪个部位的战略，游戏甚至还显示出每个可选项的成功概率。同样，《博德之门》系列游戏也是个混血儿，其中的即时战斗可以根据某些玩家选择的事件而暂停，比如在角色受到攻击或新敌人进入视野时。

打破常规

事实上，有些游戏并非纯粹的回合游戏或即时游戏，比如有时间限制的回合决定的设计。还有《X-Com》，这款游戏中的即时战略周围还围绕着回合制的核心——战术。而《全面战争》系列则是在回合制架构中插入即时战斗。还有《Europa Universalis》，这款技术上的即时游戏的节奏甚为缓慢，感觉就像是经典的回合战略游戏。诸如《Travian》之类的异步网页游戏解除了时间压力，但是却保留了即时玩法中的多人游戏元素，《Bang! Howdy》这款典型的策略战争游戏中每个单位的再生却是即时的。事实上，多数游戏都介于这两个极端的中间位置。

因而，最需要关注的并非游戏所贴上的标签，而是它们呈现出的游戏玩法类型。比如，塔防游戏《植物大战僵尸》表面上是即时游戏，但其特征更像传统的回合游戏。地图上有5条供僵尸行进的路途，每条上都有9个可供放置植物的格子。而且，僵尸的行为完全是可以预测的。撑杆跳僵尸总是可以跃过坚果墙，虽然它会落入咀嚼植物的口中。游戏可能看起来带有偶然性，但是和多数塔防游戏一样，可以根据可预测到的僵尸行为来构建战略玩法。即时机制只是提供时间压力，该游戏并没有利用与即时游戏相关的其他机制，比如偶然性玩法或多人模式。

Boom Blox(from arstechnica.com)

同样的，《Boom Blox》也是款不落窠臼的回合制游戏。在游戏中，玩家有不定数量的投掷次数来击倒建筑物。但是，《Boom Blox》并不像多数回合游戏，这款游戏的偶然性极强，其基于物理的游戏机制不可预测。而且，不像玩家在《植物大战僵尸》中被限定在5*9的格子上操作，这款游戏的玩家可以随意使用WiiMote来指向屏幕抛球。偶然性的存在使得两次完全相同的抛射可能不会产生相同的结果。这种不可预测的特点再加上很短的回合周期（游戏邦注：每回合只能抛射一次）让《Boom Blox》成为绝佳的多人游戏。

因此，我想说的是决定制作即时游戏还是回合游戏，不如考虑这两种样式中的哪些层面与整体设计更为契合来得重要。正如之前所过的那样，设计师要学会打破两种样式的规则。

游戏邦注：本文发稿于2010年2月1日，所涉时间、事件和数据均以此为准。（本文为游戏邦/gamerboom.com编译，如需转载请联系：游戏邦）

Game Developer Column 8: Turn-Based vs. Real-Time

Soren Johnson

One of the most important choices a designer makes at the start of a project is deciding whether to make a turn-based game or a real-time one. Each type of base game mechanic provides potential benefits and drawbacks. While turn-based games favor more strategic and transparent play, they can feel a little stodgy to players used to action-oriented titles. Real-time games, on the other hand, are more immersive and multiplayer-friendly but can also easily overwhelm new players if they are not well-paced.

Turn-based games, of course, descend directly from the board game tradition which predates video games. Indeed, the fanbase for turn-based games still overlaps significantly with the fanbase for board and card games. Real-time games (excluding sports) were only truly possible with the advent of computers. Indeed, quite a few games – Super Mario Bros., Team Fortress, FIFA, Pac-Man – could only ever conceivably be developed as real-time games.

However, quite a few games could go either way, with an understanding that each path comes with its own set of trade-offs. Roguelike dungeon-crawlers, for example, have been made as both turn-based and real-time games. Early versions, such as NetHack, were purely turn-based; the game’s clock only moves forward each time the player takes an action. However, Blizzard’s Diablo put the same explore-and-loot formula into a real-time environment and created an experience that was less strategic but more visceral and potentially addictive. Furthermore, without the waiting inherent in a turn-based system, the designers could develop a viable multiplayer mode.

Nonetheless, Diablo has not surplanted the continuing popularity of turn-based roguelikes, such as Pokemon Mystery Dungeon or Shiren the Wanderer, which maintain their own tactical charm. Thus, deciding between turn-based and real-time is not a question of which system is “better” or “worse” but rather a question of which set of trade-offs best fits the game the designer wants to make.

How Much Stuff?

One simple way to look at a game is by asking how many game systems and elements the player needs to master to feel competent. For example, a typical shooter might have ten weapons; a real-time strategy game might have fifteen units per side; a role-playing game might have twenty spells available. New players can often be intimidated by the sheer quantity of new concepts and options a game presents to them, and the time pressure of a real-time game only makes this learning experience an even greater challenge.

When first prototyping the original Civilization, Sid Meier originally built the game as a real-time simulation. Inspired by Will Wright’s SimCity, he tried to extend the concept to a global scale. He quickly found, however, that players were overwhelmed by the high number of new game systems they needed to juggle at once. After all, SimCity had no diplomacy, no trade, no combat, no research, and definitely no marauding barbarians. Thus, he changed course and rebuilt his prototype as a turn-based game, and the phrase “just one more turn” entered the gaming lexicon.

Designers always should be aware that each game can only contain so much “stuff” before the center cannot hold, and the experience overpowers the senses. By removing time pressure, turn-based games allow players to adjust the learning curve to their own needs. Veterans can still play quickly, but new players can take their time poking around the interface and thinking through their moves.

Thus, turn-based games are generally more accessible than real-time ones. It is no surprise that many of the most popular casual games are turn-based, from staples like Solitaire and Minesweeper to PopCap’s stable of Bejewelled, Bookworm, and Peggle.

Deterministic or Chaotic Play?

At their core, turn-based and real-time games play to different strengths. One example is the question of whether an experience should be deterministic or chaotic. With the former, success often depends on knowing exactly what the results of one’s actions will be; in Puzzle Quest, for example, the player needs to know that when a row of four skulls disappears, the other pieces will fall in a specific way so that a new column of consecutive red gems might form. Just because some luck elements are involved – such as the unknown new pieces which fall from the top – doesn’t mean that the player isn’t mapping out an exact series of events in her head. This sequential gameplay is one of the core strengths of turn-based games.

On the other hand, chaotic, unpredictable gameplay is a strength of real-time games. When players first spot a heavy-medic combo in Team Fortress 2, they know that they are probably in trouble, but the sequence of events to follow is so varied that players know it’s impossible to overanalyze the situation. A sniper could kill the medic. An explosion might knock the heavy off a platform. A spy might sneak up behind them. An event on the other side of the map might encourage one side to simply abandon the area. Real-time games support chaotic gameplay best because, with the added pressure of a shared clock, players are not able to reduce each situation down to a repeatable series of moves and counter-moves.

Multiplayer or Single-Player?

Another divide which defines the different strengths of turn-based and real-time games is whether the focus of the experience is multiplayer or single-player. Generally speaking, multiplayer games work best in real-time wheras turn-based games usually focus on single-player sessions. Turn-based games, like Advance Wars and Civilization, have only a tiny, hard-core multiplayer audience. On the other hand, real-time games with similar themes, such as Command & Conquer and Age of Empires, respectively, gained much of their popularity from their multi-player modes.

The reason for this divide is clear – waiting for another player to finish his turn is anathema to fun – so designers looking for a synchronous, multiplayer experience almost always prefer real-time games. However, because no one else is waiting, designers of purely single-player games give themselves the option of using turn-based elements whenever convenient, to either add some spice or allow more strategic play. For example, the single-player game Fallout 3 allows players to pause real-time combat and enter V.A.T.S. mode to strategize which enemy body parts to target, even displaying the exact probability of success for each possible choice. Similarly, the Baldur’s Gate series is a hybrid model, with real-time combat that pauses depending on certain player-selected events, such as when a character receives damage or a new enemy becomes visible.

Breaking the Rules

Indeed, these games are but a few of the many games that blur the line between “pure” turn-based and real-time systems. For example, what about turn-based decisions with a time limit, such as Madden’s play-calling clock? What about X-Com, with its crunchy real-time strategic shell surrounding a gooey turn-based tactical core? Or the Total War series, which does the exact opposite? What about Europa Universalis, which is technically real-time but plays out so slowly that it “feels” like a classic, sprawling turn-based strategy game. How about asynchronous Web-based games like Travian, which play out over months instead of minutes, eliminating the time pressure but keeping the multi-player benefits of real-time play? What about Bang! Howdy, which plays as a typical tile-based tactical wargame, except that each unit’s turns regenerate in real-time? In reality, a vast continuum stretches from one extreme to the other, and most games find a space somewhere in the middle.

Therefore, the most important thing to focus on is not the labels themselves but what types of gameplay they represent. For example, the tower-defense game Plants vs. Zombies is ostensibly real-time, but its characteristics are more in line with traditional turn-based games. Besides being solely a single-player game, the gameplay itself is strictly deterministic, even more so than many turn-based games. The map consists of five tracks along which the zombies progress, each with exactly nine slots on which to place defensive plants. Furthermore, the zombies’ behavior is entirely predictable – Pole Valuting Zombies will always jump over blocking Wall-nuts, even if that means falling right into the jaws of a Chomper plant. The game may look chaotic to an observer, but – like most tower-defense games – the strategic play is built upon predictable enemy behavior. The real-time mechanics simply provide time pressure, not the other qualities usually associated with the format, such as chaotic play or a multi-player mode.

Likewise, Boom Blox is a turn-based game which eskews the usual strengths of the format. In the game, players have a discrete number of throws during which to knock down various block-based structures. Unlike most turn-based games, however, Boom Blox is a very chaotic affair, with unpredictable physics-based game mechanics. Furthermore, unlike Plants vs. Zombies, in which players’ actions take place on a precise 5-by-9 grid, players of Boom Blox use strictly analog controls to point at the screen and then “throw” the ball with the WiiMote. Chaos theory dictates that an identical series of throws will almost never happen twice in a row. Furthermore, this unpredictable nature coupled with the very short turns (each only a single throw) makes Boom Blox an excellent multi-player game, a rare feat for turn-based video games.

Thus, in the end, deciding whether to make a game real-time or turn-based is less important than deciding which aspects of those formats are most relevant to the overall design. As they say, one needs to learn the rules to know how to break them. (Source: DESIGNER NOTES)