作者：Rob Hale

撰写博客时，我并非主要陈述事实。这是我学习过程的一部分。通过撰写我发现或学到的东西，以加深我对它们的理解。我将此博客当作助记手段。通过撰写特定主题的内容，我将此信息变成我的潜意识，进而将其变成直觉性的东西。

博客内容主要源自我所阅读的书籍或所积累的经验，因此要有所保留地看待。

vis map from criticalliteracyandcreativity.wikispaces.com

和很多设计师一样，我倾向凭直接进行操作。当生成新设计或机制时，我倾向听从潜意识，让我的直觉主导创意过程。我相信在设计初期阶段（游戏邦注：当你在制作粗略的预期内容时），这是最佳操作方式，基于本能。我们的潜意识非常强大，进行创意工作的人士就足以证明这点。企业一般会向具备良好直觉的人员支付很多酬劳。

但始终会出现光靠直觉还不够的情况。就是你凭直觉认为非常完美的设计其实事与愿违。无论出于何种原因，没有人享受于体验你的游戏，你不知道其中原因所在。

这就是为什么我觉得优秀的设计师从不会停止学习。优秀设计师不会在没有事先把握参考价值的情况下就复制其他游戏的内容。

游戏设计行业曾试图创造词汇或界定优秀机制，我虽然觉得这非常值得尊敬以及富有趣味，但我觉得他们通常只锁定于“内容或方式”，而非“原因”。

“原因”一词是主题的核心。这是科学方法和哲学的基础。通过持续询问“原因”，我们最终能够找出事情的真相。

“为什么”主要围绕批判性分析。

这让我回想起我的GCSE历史课，有位老师带给我很多灵感，他不仅告知我事件和战争信息，还教我如何进行批判性思考，试着探究事件背后的真相，深入探究“为什么”的重要性。

为回答这一问题，我积极自学认知心理学。我知道自己并非孤身奋战。有些设计师觉得不清楚“原因”没什么关系，但有些设计师则积极探究其中“原因’，同时激励我朝此迈进。

游戏行业已步入这样的阶段：游戏测试和易用性调查衍生出在游戏发行前向设计师提供工作反馈信息的行业。这些信息能够有效判定什么可行，什么不可行，但鲜少会告知你原因。因此我们必须转投批判性分析。在此直觉已无法发挥作用。

面临游戏设计问题，不清楚其中原因，我们最好诉诸反复试验。这是个高成本的过程，在你找到一个解决方案前可能会遭遇多次失败。虽然你找到解决方案，但你依然不清楚为什么这具有可行性（游戏邦注：但之前的尝试都失败）。你也许在你的兵工厂中添加技巧或机制，但你并没有真正把握问题或解决方案。

这并非坏事。显然我们已基于这种方式制作出若干杰出的电子游戏。我无法一一列举，但我猜想数量一定非常多。

但我个人觉得这些成功范例非常空洞。我并不满足于单解决问题。我想要知道为什么这变成一个问题，为什么此解决方案具有可行性。我认为通过把握这些，我将能够把这些知识添加至我的潜意识中，提高直觉感知意味着未来我将能够凭直觉避免或辨别这些问题。这就是批判性分析的核心，能够将有意识的东西变成潜意识。

但创造性思考工作内容的技能会受到知识的限制。所以我要求自己学习和把握更多电子游戏之外的东西。我认为电子游戏的完整知识并不是完全源自于这些游戏本身。互动娱乐领域并非由于微芯片而存在。玩家很早之前就开始进行互动。这一媒介也许非常新颖和独特，但原则保持不变，数个世纪以来，哲学家和心理学家就已在探究享受、乐趣和想象的本质属性。

游戏邦注：原文发布于2009年3月17日，文章叙述以当时为背景。（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）

Critical Analysis of Game Design

By Rob Hale

I am currently reading Gut Feelings: Short Cuts to Better Decision Making by Gerd Gigerenzer. If you’ve ever Read Blink (or even if you haven’t) then I recommend this book as it deals with the concept of intuition, instinct and the unconscious in a much more detailed way. I’d argue that you can completely bypass Blink altogether and go straight for this  as it is a much more useful book and very easy to read.

However this post isn’t about the book (I’ll save that for when I’ve finished it and filled it full of post-its). It’s actually about what I’m doing on this site.

When I write a blog post I am not so much telling the world things or laying out facts. This is part of my learning process. By writing about the things I discover or have learnt I’m helping to improve my understanding of them. I actually use this blog as a mnemonic device. By the act of writing about a topic I am ushering that information into my unconscious and hopefully helping it to become intuitive.

In short I’m writing this for me and not you. If you find it helpful than I’m glad. But be aware that what you see on these pages is rarely ever backed up by anything resembling evidence or research. It’s either all cribbed from books I’ve read or lessons I’ve learnt so take it with a pinch of salt.

Like a lot of Designers I tend to operate on my gut instincts a lot. When generating a new design or mechanic I tend to operate on automatic, letting my instincts rule the creative process. I believe that in the early stages of Design when you are roughing out what you want this is the best way to operate. By Instinct. Our unconscious mind is powerful as anybody who does anything remotely Creative will attest. Companies pay a lot of money for people with good instincts.

There comes a point however when Instinct isn’t enough. When your design that you felt in your gut was perfect turns out to be exactly the opposite. For whatever reason nobody is having fun playing your game and you don’t know why.

This is why I feel that a good Designer never stops learning. A good Designer doesn’t copy what other games have done without first trying to understand why it’s worth copying.

There have been several movements within Games Design to try and create a lexicon or identify good mechanics and while I find this very honourable and interesting I often feel like a it is only focusing on “What or How” and not “Why”.

“Why” is a word that drills down to the core of a subject. It’s the basis of the Scientific Method and Philosophy. By continually asking “Why?” we might eventually get at the truth of things.

“Why?” is all about Critical Analysis.

I am reminded of my GCSE History lessons, I had a Teacher who was something of an inspiration to me (one of very few) who I believe taught me not just about dates and wars but taught me how to think about things critically. To try and seek the truth behind things. The importance of continuing to ask the question: “Why?”

It is in order to help me answer this question that I am teaching myself as much as I can about Cognitive Psychology. In this I am not alone. Just as I know Designers who are comfortable never understanding “Why” I know of those that strive to understand and have also inspired me along this path.

We have reached a point in the Games Industry where Play-testing and Usability studies have spawned an entire industry purely devoted to providing a Designer with feedback on their work long before their game ships. This information is incredibly useful in identifying what does and doesn’t work but rarely ever gives you the reasons. For this we must turn to Critical Analysis. This is where our instincts begin to fail us.

Faced with a problem in a Game Design and with no clear understanding as to what may cause it we typically resort to trial and error. A costly process which can take several failures before you hit upon a solution. Even if you do find a solution you still may be none the wiser as to why it worked when previous attempts failed. You may have added a technique or mechanic to your arsenal but you are no closer to a real understanding of the problem or the solution.

This is not inherently a bad thing. Clearly we’ve managed to make some amazing videogames this way. I wouldn’t be able to tell you which ones but I’d be willing to bet it’s a large number.

However speaking personally I find these victories to be hollow. I’m not satisfied having just solved the problem. I want to understand why it was a problem and why the solution worked. I believe that by understanding this I will add that knowledge to my unconscious and refine my instincts meaning I will intuitively avoid or identify those problems in the future. This is the point of Critical Analysis, to help make the concious unconcious.

The ability to think critically about your work though is hindered by your own knowledge. So I push myself to learn and understand more outside of videogames. I don’t believe that everything we can know about videogames can be taught by them. The realm of interactive entertainment didn’t pop into existence with the microchip. People have been playing and interacting with each other since… well since I don’t  know when. The medium may be new and unique but the principles are not, Philosophers and Psychologists have been striving at the nature of enjoyment, fun and imagination for centuries.

So I write this blog and try to understand what it is they can teach me. And I pray that I never understand everything because then I would have nothing left to learn.（Source：agamesdesignblog）