作者：Lewis Pulsipher

尽管我最喜欢的是设计游戏的过程，但偶尔我也会尝试为自己的产品寻找商业发行商。但是，我们设计游戏的原因确实有很多种。

将游戏视为赚钱的方法。或许这是个显而易见的理由，但是我不认为许多人最初设计游戏的出发点就是为了大赚一笔。事实上，抱着这种想法来设计游戏的人很可能无法如愿。部分原因在于，当你仅仅为了赚钱而选择一项工作时，即便成功了也未必会对结果感到满意。更多的原因在于，通过游戏设计来赚取大量金钱是件很困难的事情，尤其是设计桌游。游戏设计师不会获得很高的声誉。如果你无法获得很高的声誉，就无法获得很多的酬劳。在电子游戏行业中，程序员的薪酬往往比游戏设计师更高。在桌游行业中，游戏设计师的薪酬要少于书籍的作者（游戏邦注：包括小说和非小说类书籍）。无论在哪个行业中，自由设计师要维持生计都是件很困难的事情。

将游戏视为对成瘾性的操控。许多社交游戏和免费游戏能够获得成功，是因为许多玩家对游戏欲罢不能，而局外人根本不知道其吸引力的来源，就像普通人看待毒品成瘾者一样。游戏简单，动作不断重复，但这些游戏却能够通过这种做法赚取金钱，有些开发商甚至能够赚得巨款。设计师的目标在于从习惯玩游戏的玩家身上榨取金钱，而不是为取悦玩家而设计游戏。

将游戏视为自我表现的形式。有些设计师只是想要表现自己，他们选择游戏作为自我表现的形式。这与“将游戏视为艺术”的观点有共通之处，设计师想要通过游戏表现某些对其他人有意义的东西。

将游戏视为艺术。所有的游戏都是艺术，尽管玩家对此并不关心。但是，游戏几乎不被人视为真正的“艺术”。正如Ian Bogost说过的那样，艺术着眼于改变世界，而娱乐只是着眼于休闲。尽管如此，许多电子游戏设计师确实认为游戏可以称为艺术。而且，有些人会将游戏当成艺术作品来创造，而不是娱乐或商业产品。

将游戏视为控制方式。相比桌游设计师而言，这种想法更多存在于电子游戏设计师（游戏邦注：指通常设计互动谜题而不是玩家与玩家面对面玩的游戏的人）身上。比如，我曾经阅读过著名视频游戏设计师Warren Spector（游戏邦注：作品有《杀出重围》和《Epic Mickey》）发表的评论，他表示自己想要控制玩家做的所有事情。如果你正在设计的是一个谜题的话，那么带有这种观点确实很合理。即便是桌游设计师，也希望能够控制玩家在游戏中的行为。

playing games(from paulkgds.tumblr.com)

将游戏视为娱乐方式。许多设计师都抱有这个观点，包括宫本茂和每年盈利上百万美元的自由桌游设计师Reiner Knizia（游戏邦注：现在从事电子游戏设计）。如果人们无法从游戏中得到享受，那么设计游戏还有什么意义呢？游戏必须让玩家乐在其中。

将游戏视为故事叙述方式。乐衷于讲述故事的人往往会成为小说家、剧作家和电影剧本作者。现在，这部分人群开始逐渐向RPG和电子游戏领域渗透。

将游戏视为待解决的有趣问题。这个观点同“将游戏设计视为游戏”相似。每款游戏都涉及到参数和限制条件。许多设计师指定了这些参数和限制条件，使目标群体从努力解决由此产生的问题中享受乐趣。

将设计游戏视为一种游戏。游戏包含目标和规则。游戏设计的整个过程本身就可以视为一种游戏。有些人以盈利、销量或玩家数量作为游戏设计的得分，也有些人选择其他的游戏设计评判方式。

我相信，世界各地的设计师对于游戏的设计有着各种各样的想法，以上只是较为常见的观点。

游戏邦注：本文发稿于2011年7月8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）

Different ways for designers to think about/approach game design

Lewis Pulsipher

While my favorite game is “the game of designing games”, I do occasionally try to find commercial publishers for them. (Not nearly as often as I “should,” however.) But there are lots of reasons to design games, ways for designers to look at their role as game designers.

Games as a way to make money. Perhaps this is obvious, yet I don’t think many people started to design games because they thought it was a way to make a lot of money. In fact, people who do start that way are probably unsuccessful. That’s partly because choosing a job simply because you think it will make a lot of money is unlikely to be satisfying even if successful. But more because it’s difficult to make a lot of money as a game designer, especially as a tabletop game designer. Game designers don’t get much credit. And if you don’t get much credit you won’t get paid much. In the video game industry programmers are routinely paid much more than game designers. In the tabletop industry game designers are paid less than the authors of books (fiction or non-fiction). In either industry it’s very difficult to make a living as a freelance designer.

A subset of this is games as manipulation of addictive tendencies. Many “social networking” games and free-to-play games succeed because players are somehow persuaded to keep playing even though outsiders cannot figure out what the attraction is–the same kind of reaction sober people (the outsiders) have to drug addicts. Simplistic and repetitive, these games nonetheless can make money, sometimes lots of money. Designers tend to think in terms of ways to extract funds from players who have been conditioned to keep playing, not in terms of entertaining players.

Games as a form of self-expression. Some people have personalities that thirst to derive meaning from life, many others don’t. Some designers just want to express themselves and choose games as one form of self-expression. At some point this melds into “games as art,” as a designer wants to use the game to express something meaningful to others.

Games as Art. All games are art, though the players don’t care. But games are rarely if ever high Art (with a capital A). As Ian Bogost has said “Art is about changing the world; entertainment is about leisure.” Nonetheless, there are many video game designers who desperately wish to believe that games are Art. (Tabletop designers don’t care.) And some will create games as artistic works rather than as entertainment or commercial venture.

Games as a form of control. This is more likely for video game designers (who often design interactive puzzles, not person-to-person games), than for tabletop designers. For example, I once read a comment by Warren Spector, a very well-known video game designer (Deus Ex, Epic Mickey), who said he wants to control everything the player does, and was opposed to the addition of human opponents. (That’s how I remember it, I don’t have it at hand.) If you’re designing a puzzle, then this is not an unreasonable point of view. Even tabletop designers want to control what the player can do, but in relation to other players who provide input that the designer cannot control.

Games as entertainment. This is the viewpoint of many designers including Shigeru Miyamoto (designer of many of the most famous Nintendo games) and Reiner Knizia, who makes more than $1 million a year as a freelance tabletop (and now video) game designer. If people don’t enjoy the game, what’s the point? The game doesn’t have to be “fun”, but has to be enjoyable.

A sub-category of the above is games as storytelling. Wannabe storytellers used to become novelists or playwrights or, more recently, filmakers. Now some go into RPGs and video games.

Games as interesting problems to solve. This is close to “game design as a game.” Every game involves constraints and limitations. Many designers specify those constraints and limitations, and then try to solve the resulting problem to produce something a target group enjoys playing.

Game design as a game. Games involve goals and rules. The whole process of designing games can be seen as a game in itself. Some people use money or unit sales or the number of people who play a game as a way of keeping score. Other people find other ways of keeping score.

I’m sure there are other ways to look at it, these are some of the more common ones. (Source: Pulsipher Game Design)