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

阐述趣味性直觉的定义及其培养方法

发布时间:2011-11-27 09:12:38 Tags:,,

作者:Tim Lang

游戏设计师必须能够理解各种层次的“趣味性”。首先,他们应当可以描述出某个特定游戏、任务或挑战的趣味性。他们还需要某种直觉,甚至在游戏原型被规划出之前就知道哪些内容对玩家来说会有趣。我将这种感觉称为“趣味性直觉”,如果你认为自己没有天生强大的趣味性直觉,不必感到担心。你可以培养自己的趣味性直觉。

the fun song(from blog.163.com)

the fun song(from blog.163.com)

趣味性理论

Sid Meier将趣味性定义为“一系列有趣的选择”。许多人都曾经思索过他这句话的含义。多数人持有的观点是,玩家在游戏中做出的各个选择都是平等的。换句话说,Meier认为游戏产生趣味性的关键是确保游戏的平衡。

在《A Theory of Fun for Game Design》中,Raph Koster将趣味性视为学习新事物。那么,根据Koster的说法,只要游戏中存在玩家无法完全理解的层面,那么游戏就会有趣。这个原则也适用于多数神秘小说中,你需要读到小说结束才能够明白事情的缘由。

相比之下,Ernest Adams(游戏邦注:Gamasutra网站“Designer’s Notebook”专栏作者)列举出的是影响趣味性的条件列表。他提及的并不一定是趣味性理论,但是他总是会提到游戏中那些影响趣味性的内容。依Adams的观点,只要移除游戏中并不有趣的东西就可以创造出趣味性。比如,Adams经常提到的条件是玩家无法在任何节点储存游戏,这也是游戏中常常令人感到懊恼的东西。也就是说,让玩家可以随时随地储存游戏,游戏就可以变得更加有趣。

事实在于,不同的人对趣味性有不同的看法。有些人通过不断地玩沙盘游戏来寻找乐趣。《模拟人生》的成功便足以说明这一点。有些人从富有竞争性的任务中寻找乐趣。这也是为何拥有Xbox成就点数的游戏如此盛行的原因。

我认为趣味性与挑战和奖励的本质有关。我的看法是,只要玩家获得的奖励能够与他所面对挑战的难度相符,那么游戏就会有趣。当挑战过于简单时,玩家便会很快失去兴趣,因为他毫不费力就可以获得大量的奖励。当挑战过于艰难时,玩家要么产生过大的挫败感并离开游戏,要么在克服巨大挑战后却只能获得微薄的奖励,从而感到失望。这便是作弊会影响趣味性的缘由:作弊使得每个挑战都过于简单,玩家并没有真正通过努力来获取奖励。

何谓趣味性直觉

趣味性直觉是设想游戏玩法和传播游戏机制趣味性的能力。对于游戏设计师而言,这个技能应当像呼吸那样成为一种本能。无论何时,每当有人向我阐述他们的下个新颖和绝妙的游戏想法时,我都会立即想象出自己正在玩他们所描述的游戏。这样,我就可以开始判断他们所提出的想法是否有趣。

这听起来很棒是吧?我是如何培养起这个技能的呢?能够从书本中找到答案吗?或许可能。我还未看到能够传授趣味性直觉的书籍,尽管确实可能存在此类书籍。但是,我所采用的方法比阅读乏味的书籍要好得多。培养趣味性直觉的最好方法就是玩游戏,玩许许多多的游戏。

玩你喜欢的游戏。想清楚为何你认为它们很有趣。玩你讨厌的游戏。构思你要采取何种措施来让这些游戏变得更好。不要单纯为了乐趣去玩游戏。你应当要分析它们。弄明白哪个游戏机制起到良好作用,哪个游戏机制存在缺陷。对于那些无法发挥作用的机制,思考提升它们的方法。

设想游戏玩法

thinking_eyesshut(from gamecareerguide.com)

thinking_eyesshut(from gamecareerguide.com)

在脑中设想游戏玩法在趣味性直觉中占据半壁江山。游戏设计师需要做的事情就是做有关游戏的白日梦。

在我的职业生涯中,老板经常会看到我盯着某个空白的东西,一脸茫然。有些谴责我在工作时打瞌睡,有些会跟我开玩笑吓我一跳,因为我并没有意识到他们就在我身边。为什么呢?通常情况下,我正沉湎于电子游戏及其机制的世界中。

优秀的想象力是设想的关键所在。我自认为自己创造力还不错,因为总是有着活跃的想象力,但是这并非我与生俱来的能力。无论你是否相信我的说法,你需要通过努力去培养这种活跃的想象力。

著名作曲家柴可夫斯基总是担心自己的创意会在某天枯竭,这样会对余生的创作产生极大的影响。其实,他本不该有这种担心。创造力(游戏邦注:与想象力间有很强的联系)就像你身体中的肌肉一样。你使用的越多就会变得越强大。

因为我从家中到办公室需要驾车行驶很长一段时间,所以我经常在汽车中做着有关游戏、故事和音乐的白日梦,在思维处于麻木状态的驾车期间有许许多多的东西在我的脑中出现。某些最棒的游戏想法正是在我独自行驶在路上的时候想到的。

但是,只有活跃的想象力是不够的。想象力可以帮助你的思维四处徘徊并遇见各种奇怪的世界,在这些世界中你将自己视为英雄,但是要真正构建起趣味性直觉,你必须为自己的想象力设定焦点。思考某个游戏机制,从头到尾、从你能想到的所有游戏层面来体验这个机制。

设想的另一个重要层面是拥有优秀的空间思维。拥有强大空间思维的人能够以三维的形式来感知他们的世界。在照片和图像方面,多数人都有着优秀的空间思维能力。培养空间思维的方法有很多种。有些教育者使用电子游戏作为培养的工具。多伦多大学开展了一项研究,并将相关报告发布在《Psychological Science》上(游戏邦注:时间为2007年10月),研究发现玩电子游戏可以提升男女玩家的空间思维。

解谜也是提升空间思维的绝妙方法。七巧板谜题(游戏邦注:用各种各样的图形拼成正方形或其他预定图形)能够显著地提升空间能力。玩乐高积木也是个提升空间思维的方法。还有种提升该技能的方法是学习和使用3D编辑器,比如3ds Max、UnrealEd或Maya,这些都是游戏设计师必须熟悉的工具。

从其他游戏中吸取教训

游戏设计师可以做的最重要的事情就是玩游戏。玩大量不同的游戏来提升设想的能力。如果你没有足够的资金来购买每月的最新游戏,可以采用租赁游戏的方式。作为游戏设计师,你确实需要去玩大量的游戏。

当我面试设计求职者的时候,我通常会问他们玩过什么游戏并从中学到了何种设计经验教训。如果我问某个求职者他最喜欢的游戏的哪个方面让他着迷,而他的回答如果是“我不知道”,那么他就不可能获得这个职位。

玩大量游戏可以构建起深层次的游戏玩法体验。玩大量的游戏还可以让你熟悉游戏玩法机制。比如,假设你正在开发Treyarch的《蜘蛛人》系列新续作,而你只玩过系列游戏中的首作。那么在设计蜘蛛网挥舞的机制时,你或许又会回到首作中采用的模式。但是如果你玩过首作和续作,你就可以选择首作中较为复杂的方法,也可以选择续作中更为简单的方法。

如果对游戏玩法没有深层次的认识,对游戏机制不熟悉,那么你会发现自己正在使用的是老旧过时的机制,而不是在自己掌握的大量游戏机制中选择最适合游戏玩法的机制。如果《永远的毁灭公爵》使用与《毁灭公爵3D》相同的只需键盘的控制方式,会发生什么情况呢?游戏不仅显得老旧过时,而且很可能只能售出10套。冲着《永远的毁灭公爵》的名头,可能销量会多点,但是那些购买者势必会感到特别失望。

如果那些不了解过去的人重复犯错会受到谴责的话,那么那些未学过劣质机制而重复的人同样也应当受到谴责。如果不玩足够多的游戏,你就不会了解到之前的游戏设计师所犯下的错误。

批判性分析

对游戏进行批判性分析是每个游戏设计师都应当掌握的技能,这是趣味性直觉的核心所在。如果设想游戏玩法的能力占据趣味性直觉的半壁江山的话,那么另外一半就是能够批判性地分析现有的游戏及其机制。

要如何对游戏玩法进行批判性分析呢?现在,是时候回想起那些你在学校中进行的批判性思维训练了。首先,收集所有的信息,方法可以是玩游戏也可以是在脑中构思游戏机制。以测试者的角度来玩游戏。尽你所能努力去打破它。

其次,注意游戏所采用的方法,脱离游戏背景审视机制。通常情况下,游戏中的场景和奖励会误导我们对机制的判断。

接下来,问问你自己对这个机制的感觉如何。它是否让你产生挫败感?是否让你感到快乐?它的难度曲线是否让你感到愤怒?为什么?

你需要了解到机制中存在何种问题。考虑机制中存在的问题并不意味着整个机制都是不好的。有许多机制中的确存在问题,但是这些问题并没有摧毁整个机制。比如,在《刺客信条》的某些关卡中,玩家漫无目的地奔跑和躲避守卫的追捕,因为守卫无处不在。几乎在你出现的任何地方都会有至少一个守卫看到你。这是否意味着整个机制都存在问题呢?当然不是。但是做出些许改变或许会让机制变得更好。

刺客信条(from gamesradar.com)

刺客信条(from gamesradar.com)

如果某项机制中存在问题,想想如何将其改善。这又是个非常重要的问题,也是我经常在面试游戏设计师时询问的问题。

以《刺客信条》为例,以下想法或许可以纠正机制的部分问题:

1、缩小追捕玩家的守卫的视线范围

2、守卫在见到玩家后不会立即进入攻击状态,直到有个已经在追捕玩家的守卫碰到他们

3、减少守卫的数量

这些改变是否能够完美地解决机制中存在的问题呢?如果不把它们放在游戏中试验下,这个问题便很难回答清楚,但是至少我认真地思考了问题并且得出了某些可能的解决方案。

为提升趣味性直觉,你还需要经常做的就是阅读游戏评论。如果能够做到的话,也可以写写评论。向其他人描述机制可以帮助你理解机制的好处和坏处。

培养趣味性直觉

一旦你养成强大的设想能力和批判性分析能力,就可以将它们整合起来。

当有人向你解释某个想法时,或者当你的思维在游戏机制间游曳时,尽你所能努力设想出更多细节。想象自己手中正握着控制器,正在玩这款描述中的游戏。也可以真正拿起控制器体验游戏。

在脑中体验过游戏或机制之后,想想其他类似游戏的机制。这个想法与之相比如何?更好还是更坏?如何进行提升和改善?当然,最重要的是,它是否有趣?即便机制无法完美地运行,如果有趣,那么仍然是个好机制。

游戏需要趣味性。没有趣味性的游戏一无是处。设计师可以大胆抛弃某些无趣的东西。

在决定机制是否有趣的时候有些需要记住的东西。首先,要善待玩家。玩家可以感觉到自己受到欺骗,当他们发现这一点时,会毫不迟疑地抛弃你的游戏。如果某个规则可以作用于玩家,那么它就应该对游戏中所有的角色有效。比如,不可设置某个敌人可以射穿但玩家不可射穿的障碍物。这便是玩弄玩家的行为。要构想其他的方式来平衡游戏难度。

其次,要记住的是,你的本能直觉就是能够发挥作用的趣味性直觉。我都已经数不清有多少次自己的本能告诉我某个游戏机制很差,甚至在我于脑中模拟游戏机制之前,或者最后在游戏中的实践证明了自己的本能是正确的。我现在已经学会了倾听和相信自己的本能直觉,你也应当这么做。

游戏邦注:本文发稿于2008年3月25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,拒绝任何不保留版权的转载,如需转载请联系:游戏邦

The Fun Instinct

Tim Lang

Game designers have to understand “fun” on a few levels. For one, they need to be able to verbalize what they find fun about a particular game, task, or challenge. They also need to have an intuitive sense about what will be fun for players before a game is even prototyped. I call this sense the “fun instinct,” and if you don’t think you were born with a strong instinct for fun, never fear. You can actually cultivate your own fun instinct.

Theories of Fun

Sid Meier famously defined fun as “a series of interesting choices.” Plenty of people have speculated what he meant by that. Most of the opinions state that of the choices a player makes in a game, no one choice is better than the others. In other words, Meier believes that the key to making a game fun is making sure it’s well balanced.

In A Theory of Fun for Game Design, Raph Koster equates fun to learning new things. According to Koster, then, as long as there are aspects of a game that a player doesn’t fully understand, the game is still fun. The same principle is at work in most mystery novels; you have to read to the end to find out who did it.

Conversely, Ernest Adams (in his “Designer’s Notebook” column on Gamasutra.com) created a list of conditions that deny fun. He refers to them as “Twinkie denial conditions.” It’s not necessarily a theory of fun, but he always notes the things in a game that ruin the fun. From Adam’s perspective, fun is created by simply removing the things in a game that aren’t fun. For example, Adams frequently mentions the condition of not being able to save anywhere you want — one of my own pet peeves. By allowing the player to save anywhere, the game becomes more fun.
These three game designers put forth interesting opinions that spark plenty of debate — but are they incomplete? Possibly.

The truth is that different people find fun in different ways. Some people find their fun in playing in a sandbox for hours and hours. The success of The Sims is proof enough of that. Other people find fun in completing tasks. That’s why games with Xbox Achievement points are so popular.

My opinion of what is fun has to do with the nature of challenges and rewards. I believe that a game is fun as long as the player’s reward is comparable to the difficulty of the challenge she or he faces. When the challenge is too easy, the player loses interest because she used too little effort to receive a large reward. When the challenge is too great, the player either gets frustrated and stops playing, or feels let down after overcoming a great challenge and receiving a paltry reward. That’s why cheating ruins the fun: It makes every challenge so easy, you never actually earn your reward.

What is the Fun Instinct?

The fun instinct is the ability to visualize gameplay and disseminate how fun a game mechanic will be. For game designers, this skill should be as instinctual as breathing. Whenever someone is explaining to me their next new and great game idea, I instantly visualize myself playing the game they are describing. From there I can start making judgments whether the idea they present will be any fun.

Sounds great right? Where do I sign up for that skill? Can you find it in a book? Maybe. I haven’t come across any books that can teach the fun instinct, but they may be out there. I’ve got a better way than a boring old book, though. The best way to develop your Fun Instinct is to play games. Play lots of them. And then play some more.

Play the games you love. Figure out why you think they’re fun. Play games you hate. Decide what you would do to make those games better. Play games you wouldn’t be caught dead playing. Don’t just play them for fun. Analyze them. Figure out which game mechanics work well, and which don’t. For the ones that don’t work well, figure out the best way to improve them so they do.

Visualizing Gameplay

Visualizing gameplay in your head is easily half of the fun instinct. Daydreaming about games is what game designers do.

Throughout my career, my bosses have frequently caught me staring into space with a blank look on my face. Some accused me of dozing off on the job. Others took delight in scaring the bejeezus out of me because I didn’t notice they were there. Why didn’t I see them? Usually, I was lost in a world of video games and their mechanics.

A good imagination is key to visualization. As a self proclaimed hyper-creative, I’ve always had an active imagination, but it wasn’t something I was born with. Believe it or not, an active imagination is something you have to work at having.

The legendary composer Tchaikovsky lived with the constant fear that his creativity would someday dry up, and he would spend the rest of his life with writer’s block. He needn’t have feared that. Creativity (which is strongly linked to imagination) is like any other muscle in your body. The more you use it, the stronger it becomes.

Because I have a long drive from my home to the office, I frequently daydream in the car about games, stories, music, anything that floats across my brain during the mind-numbing drive. Some of the best ideas I’ve come up with have been during my alone time on the road.

You can’t just have an active imagination, though. It helps to let the mind wander and visit various fantasy worlds where you have cast yourself as a hero, but to truly build your fun instinct, you have to give your imagination focus. Think up a game mechanic, and play through it from beginning to end from as many aspects of the game as you can get.

Another important aspect of visualization is having good spatial skills. People with strong spatial skills can perceive their world in three dimensions. Most people with good spatial skills think in pictures and images. There are plenty of ways to develop spatial skills. One tool that some educators use is video games. A study conducted at the University of Toronto and published in Psychological Science (October 2007) discovered that playing video games improved spatial skills in men and women.

Block puzzles are another great way of improving spatial skills. Practicing Tangram puzzles (odd geometric pieces that are arranged to make a square or other predetermined shape) can greatly improve one’s spatial skills. Playing with Legos is another good spatial skill builder. Another way to develop the skill is by learning and using a 3D editor, like 3ds Max, UnrealEd, or Maya, which are all tools a game designer should be familiar with anyway.

Playing with Legos could help you be a better game designer.

One of the most important things a game designer can do is practice playing games. Play a lot of different games to increase your visualization skills. If you can’t afford to buy the latest games every month, consider investing in a game rental subscription. As a game designer, you really do need to be playing a lot of games.

When I interview design candidates, I often question them on what games they have played and what sort of design lessons they’ve picked up from them. If I ask a candidate what it is about his favorite games that make them his favorites, and he answer, “I don’t know,” he’s just kissed that job goodbye.

Playing a lot of games builds a depth of gameplay experiences. Playing a lot of games also builds familiarly with gameplay mechanics. Let’s say, for example, you were working on a sequel to Treyarch’s Spider-Man series, and that you’d only played the first game in the series. While designing the web swinging mechanic, you would probably fall back on the two button web swinging style used in the first iteration of the game. But if you had played the first and the second Spider-Man games, you would have your choice between the first, more complicated method of web swinging, or the simpler press-and-release style of web swinging from the second.

Without having that depth of knowledge of gameplay and familiarity of game mechanics, you may find yourself using an old and outdated mechanic instead of drawing on a large background of mechanic knowledge, and choosing the one most appropriate for the gameplay. What would happen if Duke Nukem Forever used the same keyboard-only controls that were in Duke Nukem 3D? Not only would the game get slammed for being archaic and backward, but it would probably only sell about 10 copies — okay, maybe a few more because it’s Duke Forever, but those who bought it would be supremely disappointed.

If those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it, then those who don’t learn about bad mechanics are condemned to repeat them, also. I can’t say it enough. Not playing enough games does not expose you to mistakes that designers in previous games have already made.

Critical Analysis

Critical analysis of games is a skill that every game designer should have; it is at the core of the fun instinct. If half of the fun instinct is the ability to visualize gameplay, then the other half is being able to critically analyze existing games and their mechanics.

How do you do a critical analysis of gameplay? It’s time to go back to those critical thinking exercises you probably did in school. First, gather all the information, either by playing the game or playing the mechanic in your head. Play the game like a tester. Do everything you can to try to break it.

Second, pay attention to what the game is actually doing. Put down the rose-colored fanboy glasses and take the mechanic for what it is, outside the game context. Too often we will suffer through a bad mechanic time and again because of either the setting or the promise of reward.

Next, ask yourself how this mechanic makes you feel. Does it make you feel frustrated? Does it make you feel happy? Does its difficulty curve make you angry? Why?

You have to decide what is wrong with the mechanic. Thinking something is wrong with a mechanic doesn’t necessarily mean that the whole mechanic is bad. There have been plenty of game mechanics that have had something wrong with them that didn’t ruin the entire mechanic. For example, in the later levels of Assassin’s Creed, it is pointless for the player to run and hide from the guards because there are so many guards. It’s nearly guaranteed that wherever you are, at least one guard has you in his line of sight. Does this mean the entire mechanic was broken? Of course not. But it might have benefited from a little tweaking.

If something is wrong with a mechanic, ask yourself how you would make it better. That is another very important question, and incidentally another one I always ask when I’m interviewing game designers to hire.

In the Assassin’s Creed example, here are a few ideas that might fix that part of the mechanic:

Reduce the line of sight range of the guards chasing the player so they don’t see as far

Guards not in the immediate vicinity of the assault don’t wake up when they see the player until an alerted guard touches them

Reduce the number of guards.

Would any of these alterations fix the mechanic perfectly? It’s hard to say without putting them in the game and trying them out, but the point is I’ve thought carefully about the problem and have come up with a number of possible solutions.

Another thing that you should do frequently to improve your fun instinct is to read game reviews, and if you can, write them, too. Nothing helps you understand what is wrong or right with a mechanic than trying to verbalize it to someone else.

Nurture Your Fun Instinct

Once you’ve developed strong visualization skills and your critical analysis skills, it’s time to put them together.

When someone is explaining an idea to you, or when your mind is wandering on game mechanics, try to visualize as much of the detail as you can. Imagine that the controller is in your hand, and you’re playing the game as it’s described to you. Don’t be afraid to actually pick up a game controller and try it out.

After you’ve played the game or mechanic a bit in your head, think about mechanics from other games that are similar. How does this idea compare? Is it better? Is it worse? How can it be improved? And of course, most importantly, is it fun? Even if a mechanic doesn’t work perfectly or is a little clumsy, if it’s fun, then it’s a good mechanic.

Games are meant to be fun. If you don’t have fun in your game, you don’t have anything. Never be afraid to let something go if it isn’t fun.

There are a few things to remember when trying to decide whether a mechanic is fun. The first is don’t screw the player. Players know when they’re getting the shaft, and they won’t hesitate to rip your game to shreds when they find out. If a rule applies to the player, it should apply to all the characters in the game. For example, don’t put up a force field that the enemies can shoot through but the player can’t. That’s screwing the player. Think of an alternate way of balancing the difficulty.

Second, remember that your gut instinct is the fun instinct at work. Listen to it. I don’t know how many times my gut has told me a game mechanic was bad before I even played it out in my head, or played it out in-game only to find out my gut was right. I’ve learned to listen to and trust my gut instinct, and you should too. (Source: Game Career Guide)


上一篇:

下一篇: