作者：Adam Rebika

今天我打算深入阐述我在之前所提到的游戏项目：《The Afterworld》。

我是在三年前想到了这个游戏理念，但是游戏初稿却在玩家的首次游戏测试时便遭到了彻底的否定。那时候的我缺少足够的技能和经验去创造出能够有效地结合在一起的系统和背景。但是我却并未放弃，当我投入了大量的时间在一些小规模项目中并吸取了各种经验后，我相信今天的自己有能力再次回到这个项目上，并做得更出色！

how-to-get-design-inspiration（from esdev.net)

让我进一步分析这款游戏。游戏理念是关于玩家化身死亡之魂游荡在阴间。也就是游戏一开始玩家的灵活便将穿越无数次轮回，直到最终实现了自己的抱负而挣脱这种循环，获得重生。

抱负是人们生活中的主要动机，是人们所追求的最重要的目标。抱负可以是关于权利，愉悦的心情或知识等等；它将贯穿于人们的生活中引导着人们向前发展。不管是对于游戏还是整个宇宙来说，它都是位于中心点的位置之上。在这款游戏中玩家不能通过杀死怪物或获得经验值而升级，而是应该努力达到与自己的抱负相关的目标才能升级。这便紧密地维系起故事的发展与角色的发展之间的关系——因为玩家所面对的目标将会变得更加强大且复杂，所以玩家只能为此做出更大的牺牲。同时抱负也能够造就有趣的团队机制，因为在游戏过程中玩家将不得不选择别人的目标并想办法完成这些目标（当然了大多数GM都清楚这些目标很快便会趋于矛盾）。

这一游戏机制的结果便是玩家将引导着整个游戏世界而发展，在此每个人都将努力实现每个特定的目标，并且大多数社交互动也都是围绕着这一理念而展开。如果帮助别人能够帮助自己实现抱负，其他玩家定会毫不犹豫地伸出援手。

就像我之前所说的，游戏背景是关于玩家在到达阴间之前其灵魂必须经历无数次的轮回。而在游戏过程中玩家也可以根据自己的想法去转变轮回。

当玩家第一次开始游戏时，他们所呈现出的便是最后一次轮回的样子。但每一次当他们完成一个新的目标，他们便会进入又一次轮回。也就是说玩家可以随时决定转变成一个全新的角色。假设一个人的志向是获得更大的权利，并且他一辈子都在朝着更高权势而努力，并最终成了一个位高权重的政治家。当然，他的技能可以让他更好地适应社交环境，并在此轻松地与别人交涉相处。随后他开启了一个新的轮回，即转变成了一名维京战士。也就是当他处在一个需要进行战斗的环境下，他便会选择从20世纪的政治高官转变成维京战士。

但是这种游戏玩法却大大抹杀了角色专门化的理念，特别是在PnP角色扮演游戏中，这种设置一点都不有趣。让我们想象在一个拥有4名玩家的小组中，2名玩家专攻于社交技能，而另外2名玩家则注重战斗技能。当这个小组所面临的是战斗环境时，这2名具有战斗技能的玩家将行动起来，但是剩下的2名玩家便只能呆呆地站在一旁观战。在面对交流环境时情况则刚好相反。也就是在这种设置中肯定会出现一部分玩家享乐另一部分玩家无聊的情况。游戏应该让所有玩家都能够随时体验到乐趣。

事实上为了做到这一点，玩家就必须改变角色的外观和个性（但是却不会完全改变角色，因为他们仍然是存在于同一具躯壳中），从而让游戏避免出现“玛丽苏”（即非常完美，“要风得风，要雨得雨”，凌驾于故事情节之上的人物）式的小组，即玩家能够同时做任何事：如果玩家能够把握双方的差异，他便可以按照自己的想法做各种事，但是游戏角色仍需要面临一定的限制。

Creative-inspiration(from blog.hostbaby.com)

接下来我将谈谈一个更多元化的主题：当提到创造一些新内容时创造者的灵感来源是什么。

我并不认为单凭人类的大脑便能够创造出任何全新的内容：我们只能改造一些我们从别处所看到的事物。我们所获得的每个理念都是源自我们所看到，听到或体验到的事物。

当然，这并不是我们可以去复制别人想法的借口。虽然我们只能改造现有的事物，但是幸运的是我们并不会被局限于同一个领域之内。获得创造性的秘诀便是找到别人从未涉及的全新灵感来源。

所以你的视野必须足够开阔并充满好奇心。整个世界充斥着各种等待被挖掘的理念，并且我们也可以轻松找到这些理念。尝试各种自己从未做过的事，在街上四处观察周边事物，选择去观看那些从未看过的电影，在图书馆随便挑选一本书籍进行阅读等等。当然了，你可能不会喜欢这种随机选择的事物，但是请不要忽视这种体验，这是帮助你了解它并理解别人为何会喜欢这一事物的最佳方法。

在某些特定情况下，在你自己的项目上采纳别人的理念也是一种好方法。并不是说别人做过了你便不能尝试了，只是你需要从借鉴中找到最佳平衡点（更好地处理借鉴内容与自己的想法）。

我们应该借鉴或不应该哪些内容？

*我们不应该复制那些能够明确定义游戏特性的内容，如环境，故事，角色以及一些特殊的游戏机制。

*而是应该借鉴那些能够用于维持游戏特性的内容，如控制方法，以及一些基本的游戏机制等。

让我们以《暗黑血统》为例进行说明。几乎玩过这款游戏的玩家都清楚这款游戏很大程度遵循了《塞尔达》模式。即玩家进入一个新的领域，找到地下城，获得道具，地图和boss钥匙，并凭借新道具而杀死boss，前往下一个领域。但是却没有人在游戏中认为自己在玩《塞尔达》：也就是这款游戏仍然具有自己的特性！

在这个例子中，我认为采用《塞尔达》模式是个很棒的想法，它能够更好地带动其它游戏元素的发展。开发者并不会浪费更多时间和资源去创造一些全新的内容，因为《塞尔达》在之前已经完成了这种尝试。

控制方法亦是如此。你是否注意到在每一款射击游戏中，我们会移动左摇杆，瞄准右边对象，并用右边的触发器发射子弹？

我们不该责备开发者总是遵循着这种控制方法：玩家已经习惯了如此控制，所以你改变了这种控制方法便是改变了玩家的习惯。当玩家面对一款新射击游戏时，如果他们可以无需要重新适应游戏控制，他们便会立刻开始游戏。

在创造《The Afterworld》时，我便很快找到了能够构成游戏特性的元素：抱负和轮回系统。

所以对于其它游戏元素，我便选择参考其它PnP角色扮演游戏，并挑选最合适的内容：玩家拥有某些属性和技能，并且每次轮回的结果都是由玩家的相关属性和技能所决定。现在我不再会复制粘贴其它游戏系统，不过我还会复制其它游戏所使用的主干线。就像在第一人称射击游戏中那样，这么做能够大大缩短玩家学习游戏机制的时间，让他们能够把更多时间用于学习更复杂的内容并熟悉整个游戏世界。

总之，当出现以下情况时你便可以采纳其它游戏中的理念：

*这些理念不会决定你的游戏特性；

*这些理念也不是你所模仿的游戏的特性；

*你能够将节省下来的时间用于思考如何突显自己游戏的特性。（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 Afterworld – General presentation of the project / Design idea number 1: finding inspiration

by Adam Rebika

So, it is time for me to give you a bit more details about this project I talked about in my introduction post: The Afterworld.

I came up with the concept of this game something like three years ago, but the first draft got basically destroyed by my players in the very first play test. At the time, I obviously lacked the skills and experience to make a system and a setting that really would have worked together. But I did not give up, and, after spending a lot of time gaining experience on smaller scale projects, today I believe I finally am ready to get back to this project for once and for good.

Now, let me give you more details about this game. The idea here is that players incarnate (well “incarnate” might not be the right word but whatever) dead souls wandering in the Afterworld. More precisely, it starts with the hypothesis that human souls pass through thousands of reincarnations until they are freed from this cycle by achieving, during one of their lives, their ambition.

The ambition is the main motive that guides everybody through their lives,  the one thing they long for more than anything else. It can be power, pleasure, knowledge… Anything that is strong enough to guide one personn through her life. This is one of the central points of both the gameplay AND the universe. The players do not level up by killing monsters or gaining XP, but by achieving always bigger goals all related to their ambitions. This creates deep links between the evolution of the story and the evolution of the characters, since the goals quickly become so big and hard to reach that they will need strong dedication from the players. I believe it can also create interesting group mechanics, as the players will have to pick whose goal they will pursue (and of course, most GMs know that these goals can and will quickly contradict each other).

The consequence of this mechanic on the setting is that the players will navigate in a world in which everyone is trying to fulfill very accurate goals, and most social interactions will be centered around this idea. People will only help you if it helps them pursue their own ambitions.

As I said earlier, this setting is based on the idea that, before reaching the Afterworld, every soul had to go thrugh countless reincarnations. And during the course of the game, they can switch reincarnation almost at will.

When they first start the game, they only have their latest reincarnation, the one during which they fulfilled their ambition. But every time they reach a new goal, they unlock another reincarnation. Basically, they can, at any moment, decide to reroll a new character. For example, imagine someone who’s ambition was power. He achieved it during a life in which he managed to become a high ranking politician. Of course, his skills will be very useful for social situations, as he can easily negociate. Then he unlocks a new reincarnation, during which he was a viking warrior. So, if he gets in a situation where he needs to fight, he will switch from 20th century politician to viking warrior.

Of course, this quickly kills the idea of character specialization, but in a PnP RPG, I think this is not something fun. Indeed, imagin a group of 4 players: two of them specialize in social skills while 2 specialize in fighting skills. If the group has two fight, two characters will be acting, while the two other one will just stand aside and watch. And if the players have to negociate something, two of them will be talking while the two other ones will be waiting. Basically, you will always have a part of your table which is bored while the other part is having fun. Here, everyone can join the fun at any moment.

And the fact that, do to so, they have to change the appearance and personnality of their character (while not compeletly changing the character, since they still are the same personn, somehow) allows the game to avoid having a group of mary-sues who can do anything at the same time: the player can do anything, but the character still has limitations, if you can grasp the difference.

Well, I think I have said enough for today, I’ll give more details about the game in a few weeks. For now, I would like to talk about a more generalist subject: the sources of inspiration when it comes to creating something new.

I do not believe that the human mind can actually create anything really new: we can only adapt things we saw somewhere else. Every idea you will ever get will actually come from something you saw, heard, or experiencned.

Now, this is not an excuse to copy what others have done. We can only adapt things, but the upside is that we are not bound to adapting things inside the same domain. The secret to being really innovative is being able to find new sources of inspiration, that no one had thought of before.

To do so, you should always be open and curious. The world is teeming with ideas that only want to be used, and that can be found very easily. Do something you’ve never done before, look around you when walking in the street, go watch a movie that you would never have gone watching, pick a random book at the library. Of course, you may not appreciate it, but not being taken away by an experience is the best way to study it and study why some other people like it.

But taking ideas from what others have done before in your same domain, can, in some specific situations, be good, too. The idea here is that it is not because someone did it before that you mustn’t do it. You only have to find the right balance.

What’s the difference between things we should and things we shouldn’t copy?

What you shouldn’t copy is what makes the identity of your game: the setting, the story, the characters, or some specific game mechanic.

What you should copy is what supports the identity of your game: the control schemes, some basic gameplay mechanics etc.

If you want an example, take Darksiders. As pretty much everybody who has played this game found out, it does follow a very Zelda-like pattern. Get into a new area, find the dungeon, get the item, the map and the boss key, kill the boss, move on to the next area thanks to your new item. But I do not believe anyone ever thought, while playing this game, that he was playing Zelda: the game still has its own very strong identity.

In this case, I believe taking a Zelda-like pattern was a good idea, since it served the other gameplay elements right. The developers did not waste their time and resources trying to find something new because Zelda did it before.

Same goes with the control schemes. Have you noticed how, in pretty much every shooter, you move with the left stick, aim the right one, shot with the right trigger?

And you hsouldn’t blame the developers for sticking to that control scheme:  since players have grown used to it now, making a game where you would change it just for the sake of changing it. When a player picks a new shooter game, he does not need to adapt, he can start playing right away.

In The Afterworld, I quickly found out what constitutes the identity of my game: the ambitions and the reincarnation system.

So, for the other elements, I just looked around what other PnP RPG games did, and picked what works the best: players have some attributes, some skills, and every diceroll’s outcome is determined by the related attribute and skill. Now, I did not copy-paste another system, but I allowed myself to copy the main lines that so many games use. And, like what happens with FPS games, this will drastically reduce the time the players spend learning the basic mechanics, allowing them to spend more time learning the more elaborate ones and getting familiar with the universe.

So, to conclude, you can allow yourself to pick ideas from other games if:

these ideas do not define the identity of your game;

these ideas do not define the identity of the game you’re copying;

the time you saved doing so allows you to focus on the innovations that define the identity of your game. (source:GAMASUTRA)