作者：Pascal Luban

前言

控制单人玩家的关卡设计方法已经广为人知的准则，它们可以确保游戏系统有效控制难度、节奏和能量恢复等玩家体验。但多人关卡设计所遵循的规则却有所不同，我将在下文中介绍多人关卡设计的注意事项。

技术局限性

第一个技术壁垒就是让人深恶痛绝的宽带限制。一部游戏设备也许功率极大，能够处理庞大的信息，但假如它连接到其他设备的“通道”变窄或者被掐断，那它就无从与对方流畅地交换信息，从而导致游戏速度下降甚至无法进行。

多人游戏有哪些环节最消耗网络带宽？首先就是角色的动作和动画效果。在大部分多人FPS游戏中，角色的动画效果都很有限，它们的主要动作无非就是跑、跳或蹲。但对《分裂细胞》这种多人游戏来说，丰富的动画效果却是其核心魅力所在。

《分裂细胞》多人模式版本中复杂的动画效果之一(from gamasutra)

游戏中的角色可以捕捉对方，耍些杂技，彼此攻击等等。这种丰富的动画效果非常占用带宽。但我深信这种高质量的动画效果在未来的多人游戏中将更为普遍，因为它们不但可让游戏呈现更多真实感，而且还扩展了游戏玩法，《分裂细胞》中的对抗模式便能体现这一点。

特效元素也很占用带宽，例如爆炸场景中的颗粒效果、关卡中的动态事件。后者属于地图动画效果，比如说起重机、电梯的移动，或者墙壁的爆炸。如果要与这些事件进行互动（游戏邦注：例如向电梯间扔一枚手榴弹或者让一名角色站在移动的物体上），那么地图上这些移动内容的精确位置就必须挨个衔接在一起。在此，我也深信未来多人游戏的地图会包含更多特效和地图动画元素。

特效在游戏中可不只是起点缀作用而已。它们可用制造错觉，暗化或亮化游戏环境等。总之它们对游戏玩法的贡献不容忽视。

地图事件的情况也同样如此。《分裂细胞3：混沌理论》中的多人地图广泛采用了这些元素。例如在Aquarius地图中，关卡设计师在一个上锁的门旁设置了一个可爆破的通风格子窗，它后面隐藏了一个地图任务目标（如下图所示）。假如守卫在这个格子窗旁边用手榴弹解决了一个敌人，那么他就可以同时摧毁格子窗，并为后者开辟实现其目标的捷径。

《分裂细胞3：混沌理论》Aquarius地图中的可爆破格子窗(from gamasutra)

从这一点上看来，地图事件的建设性用法可以通过改变地图布局和防守的策略，引进新的游戏玩法。《分裂细胞3：混沌理论》和《分裂细胞2：潘朵拉计划》就大量采用了这种互动性，用这些特效丰富了游戏玩法。

游戏设备之前的信息交流与参与游戏的玩家数量成正比。网络带宽瓶颈带来的直接影响之一就是，我们设计游戏时需将玩家数量和游戏内容丰富程度（游戏邦注：例如动画效果、特效、地图引导等）这些因素考虑入列。

第二个技术局限性就是游戏事件的同步性。在动作类游戏中，如射击等关键事件的同步性，直接决定游戏质量的高低。同步性问题也是招致许多玩家不满的主要原因之一。当一名高手级的玩家将光标指向其瞄准对象并扣动扳机时，他当然希望子弹准确无误地命中目标，稍有半秒钟的延时都会让他感到不快。资深玩家已经摸透了游戏特点，假如游戏系统并未像他们预想的那样迅速作出反应，他们就会产生一种“受骗”之感。Xbox平台上的《命运战士》等一些游戏很巧妙地处理了这个问题。

第三个技术局限性就是失去对玩家下一步行动的控制。假如过多玩家同一时间扎堆聚集在地图上的同个地点，并在该区域进行轰炸，生成大量的地图事件，那么游戏设备之间的交流信息就会过于膨胀，而图像的刷新率也会大幅下跌。

单人游戏并不存在这个问题，因为其关卡设计师可以在地图上均衡分配那些可能会降低设备运行速度的事件。但在多人游戏关卡中，什么事情都有可能发生。设计师很难避免玩家因超载的CPU和带宽而让游戏被卡的现象，但优秀的关卡设计可以通过鼓励玩家分布到地图上的不同区域，最小化此类超载现象带来的风险。

地图设计失误及漏洞

现在我要区分一下单人游戏与多人游戏地图设计的主要不同之处。在单人游戏中，玩家经历一个关卡时心里只有一个目标，实现目标然后闯入下一关。他每一关都不需要耗费太长时间。但在多人游戏中，每个地图聚集了大量玩家，他们在其中投入了成百上千个小时，地图中的纰漏也因此无所遁形。

因此，玩家很容易钻设计失误和漏洞的空子，在游戏中采取作弊手段，并与其他玩家交换这些信息。过度使用地图功能的另一个结果就是，假如地图设计缺乏丰富的策略，玩家很快就会失去兴趣。多人游戏地图必须避免经得起玩家成百上千个小时的游戏体验，不可让他们心生厌倦。《分裂细胞2：潘朵拉计划》发布一年后，每天仍有成千上万玩家光顾其多人游戏模式，它和《光晕2》都可以算是地图设计的成功典型。

玩家追求高效游戏策略

多人关卡设计的第三个典型局限性体现在这种游戏类型特有的高度竞争性（游戏邦注：多人协作模式例外）。多人游戏的本质是摧毁竞争对手，这就要求玩家找到最有效的制敌策略。但在单人游戏中，玩家一般都希望根据自己的节奏探索游戏中的内容。

这种多人游戏特点会造成什么结果？首先，玩家可能会完全忽略了游戏中的许多功能（例如，武器、动画、地图特效功能等），即使这些功能也真的很强大。他们只会去选择那些最有效率的功能。

第二个结果就是，它是玩家作弊动机的来源，或者诱使玩家利用地图中的漏洞让自己获益。这个问题甚至还导致大量多人游戏的难度分级系统失效。

难以说服普通玩家参与多人游戏

第四个局限性就是难以说服普通玩家参与多人游戏。原因很简单——没有人愿意反复在其他玩家面前丢脸输掉游戏。与人类竞争对手玩游戏当然更有紧迫感和刺激感，但也会增加新手级玩家的心理压力。

我们很难让菜鸟级玩家同时应对三项挑战：控制用户界面，了解地图情况，制定游戏策略。因此有许多游戏根据玩家级别设置了难度分级系统，但多数游戏仅为初学者提供了一些不完整的解决方案。

就目前来看，多人游戏主要还是硬核玩家的天下。如果我们想让多人游戏摆脱这种用户局限性，那就必须在设计游戏时就考虑到普通玩家的需求，而不是事后再迁就他们。

玩家社区的影响力

最后的一个主要局限性就是玩家社区的份量。多人游戏的存在得益于其玩家群体的支持，后者十分渴求游戏的新内容（新关卡），他们希望游戏不断完善，并提供更多适合自己玩法的竞争元素等。因游戏而生的玩家社区地开发者和发行商帮助极大，但游戏开发过程中就必须考虑到这个因素。

游戏邦注：原文发表于2006年10月26日，所涉事件及数据以当时为准，本系列未完待续。（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）

Multiplayer Level Design In-Depth, Part 1: The Specific Constraints of Multiplayer Level Design

by Pascal Luban

Introduction

The rules that govern single player level design are becoming more and more well known. They help make sure that the gamer’s experience is controlled in terms of difficulty, rhythm, renewal etc. But multiplayer level design does not follow the same constraints as those of single player level design. I will start by describing the specific constraints of multiplayer level design.

Technical Constraints

The first technical constraint is the infamous bandwidth bottleneck. A game machine may be high-powered and capable of processing a huge amount of information, but if the “pipe” that links it to other machines is too narrow, little information can be exchanged and the game is therefore slowed down or impoverished.

What are the main points of a multiplayer game that eats up bandwidth? First there is character movement and animations. In most multiplayer FPS games, character animation is very limited. What characters do most often is run, jump or crouch. But in games such as the multiplayer version of Splinter Cell, the wealth of animations is at the heart of the game.

Characters can grab each other, perform acrobatics, hit each other etc. This wealth of animations is very demanding in terms of bandwidth. I am convinced that such a high quality of animations will become more and more present in future multiplayer games, not only because they provide more realism, but also because they enlarge gameplay possibilities, as it may be noticed when playing Splinter Cell in versus mode.

One of the numerous complex animations available in the multiplayer version of Splinter Cell – Pandora Tomorrow and Chaos Theory
Other large bandwidth consumers are special effects, such as the explosions with their particle display, and the dynamic events in the levels. The latter are map animations, such as the movement of a crane or of an elevator or the destruction of a wall. If it is possible to interact with such events (by throwing a grenade into an elevator or by positioning a character on a moving object), the exact position of these moving parts of the map must be followed image by image. Once again, I am convinced that maps of future multiplayer games will contain more and more special effects and map animations.

Special effects in a game are not only used for cosmetic purposes. They may be used to disturb vision, darken or light up the environment, leave footprints etc. Their use in terms of gameplay is obvious.

The same is true for map events. We have widely used such events in the multiplayer maps of Splinter Cell – Chaos Theory. For example, in the Aquarius map, the level designer positioned a destructible ventilation grille near a locked entry, with one of the map’s mission objectives behind (see the illustration below). If a defender uses a grenade close to this grille to kill an opponent, he destroys the grille and thus provides the latter with a quick route to his objective.

In this way, the constructive use of map events helps bring a new dimension to the gameplay of the map by changing both its layout and the defenders’ tactics. The maps of Splinter Cell – Chaos Theory and certain maps of Splinter Cell – Pandora Tomorrow are full of such interactions and use of special effects for gameplay purposes.

The amount of information exchanged among machines during a game session is proportional to the number of players. One of the direct consequences of the bandwidth bottleneck is the decision that has to be made regarding the number of players and the richness of the game (animations, special effects, map events etc.).

A destructible ventilation grille in Aquarius, one of the multiplayer maps in

The second technical constraint is the need to synchronize the events of the game. In the case of action games, the synchronization of the key events, such as shooting, is essential for the quality of the game. Synchronization problems account for the main cause of dissatisfaction among gamers. When a good player places the cursor on a moving target and pulls the trigger, he expects the bullet to reach the target immediately and exactly where he aimed at. A half-second delay is unacceptable. Good players are very precise in their game and feel “cheated” if the game does not react as quickly as they do. Some games, such as Soldier of Fortune on Xbox, handle this problem very efficiently.

The third technical constraint is the lack of control on what the players will do. If too many players are found in the same place on the map and start generating explosions and causing many map events, all concentrated in the same area the amount of information exchanged between machines becomes too large and the refresh rate of the images plummets.

This problem does not occur in single player games, because the level designer would have made sure that the events which are likely to slow down the machine are evenly distributed. But in the multiplayer level, everything is possible. It is difficult to prevent the players from willingly “stuttering” their game session by overloading the CPU and the bandwidth, but good level design should minimize the risk of overload by encouraging players to spread out in the map.

Intensive Use of the Maps

I will deal now with one of the major differences between the maps designed for single player games and those for multiplayer games. In a single player game, the player goes through a level with a single objective in mind, finishes it and passes to the next. He only spends little time in each level. But in multiplayer games, the players will spend hundreds of hours on each map. All map weaknesses will then be found.

Thus, design errors or bugs that allow cheating are revealed and exchanged among players. A second consequence of this hyper-use of the maps is the risk of player boredom if the map is not tactically rich enough. Multiplayer maps must support thousands of hours of play without letting the player feel bored. One year after the marketing of Splinter Cell – Pandora Tomorrow, thousands of multiplayer sessions were still being played every day, this is the same for other tactically rich maps such as some Halo 2 maps.

The Search for Efficient Gaming

The third typical constraint of the multiplayer level design is the consequence of the highly competitive game style that is specific to this type of game (except for cooperative modes). Since the essence of the multiplayer game is to crush the opponents, the players search for the most efficient tactics, whereas in a single player game, the players tend to play at their own pace and explore all the possibilities provided by the game.

What are the consequences? First, players completely ignore many game features (weapons, animations, specific map functions etc.), even if they show a real potential. They will only use the most efficient features.

The second consequence is the strong incentive to cheat or to take advantage of the map’s weaknesses or bugs. This problem is so important that it renders the classification in many multiplayer games null and void.

The Difficulty in Getting Casual Gamers to Play Multiplayer Games

The fourth constraint is the difficulty in getting average or casual gamers to engage in multiplayer games. The reason for this is simple: nobody likes being humiliated by losing repeatedly to gamers that give you no chance. Playing against a human opponent generates a lot of tension and makes the game more exciting, but also increases the stress level of an inexperienced gamer.

It will then be really difficult for him to put up with the three challenges he must handle simultaneously: control of the interface, knowledge of the maps and tactical vision of the game. There are many classification systems that regroup the gamers by level, but the majority only provides an incomplete solution to the problem of integrating the beginners.

At the moment, multiplayer games are reserved for the hardcore gamers. If we want multiplayer games to get out of their niche, it is vital that we design them with this in mind and not simply adapt them.

The Weight of the Gamers’ Community

Finally, the last major constraint is the weight of the gamer community.

A multiplayer game exists thanks to its players, who are hungry for new content (new levels), improvements, competitions and possibilities to adapt the game to their own style of play. The creation of a community of gamers around a game may be a blessing for a developer and its publisher, but the development of the game must be prepared in view of this.

In subsequent installments of this series of articles devoted to the multiplayer design, I will tackle my suggestions regarding:

The level design

The challenge of fine-tuning the game

The design around technical constraints

The design of a mass-accessible multiplayer game. （source:gamasutra）