作者：Kevin Oke

继《Tiny Tower》和《Pocket Planes》之后，NimbleBit于3月底推出了它的最新游戏《Nimble Quest》。虽然这是一款有趣的游戏，但我发现如下4个关键问题降低了游戏的粘性，从而影响了它的收益表现。

据AppData数据显示，《Nimble Quest》一开始的表现非常强劲，一度高居iPhone免费应用排行榜的第6名，但在撰写本文时，它的名次已跌至第217名；而在收益排行榜上，它则屈居第190名。《Nimble Quest》的排名起伏一定程度上是由我所发现的问题导致的。

强制循环

这是《Nimble Quest》最大的障碍。它的强制循环的属性导致了非常沉闷的“刷”体验，最终损害了游戏粘性。

NQ-comp-loop(from insidemobileapps)

游戏设计的一条经验法则是，循环越短，致瘾性越强。通过分析这款游戏的循环，读者可以看出，除非玩家愿意花真钱买活，否则每一次死掉都必须从起点重玩。游戏可变的持续时间意味着，随着玩家升级，他们挑战一直在上升的高分所花的时间会越来越多。

基本上，《Nimble Quest》的赚钱方案就是，让玩家受不了长时间的“刷”任务，不得不在排行榜竞争上花钱。这实在是危险的做法，因为它更适合那种持久性、所有权感觉很强的游戏，如城市模拟建设游戏和策略游戏（游戏邦注：如Kabam的《Kingdoms of Camelot》）。原因是，如果没有这种持久性，当玩家觉得受够了刷任务时，很轻易就会退出游戏。

对于靠玩家的时间来挣钱的免费游戏，如果玩家很快就因为厌烦了刷任务而退出游戏，那么游戏就无法赢利了。然而，因为它的强制循环，《Nimble Quest》在这方面太冒险了。按经验等级决定游戏的持续长度、等级进程和难度，有助于提高游戏的粘性。

竞技场玩法

竞技场的组队玩法使用了公会系统。这是提高粘性和收益的好办法。然而，竞技场的清晰度和重要性体现得并不好。总之，从我作为玩家的角度来看，竞技场的重要性似乎并不明显，对我的好处不如对新玩家的明显。所以，竞技场的吸引力不大。不妨将这款游戏与《Clash of Clans》中的组队玩法相比：

重要性

在《Clash of Clans》中，Clan Castle是玩法界面的一部分，吸引玩家的同时又强调了它在游戏中的重要性。

而在《Nimble Quest》中，竞技场只是主菜单中的一个菜单选项，并没有表现为游戏的强制循环中的一部分。

尽管在应用商店的描述中提到了竞技场的组队玩法，但开发者不能指望所有玩家都阅读甚至扫视一眼这些描述。截图是一个很好的介绍方式，在截图上放文字介绍以显示其重要性，这就更有效了。虽然开发者在《Nimble Quest》中也使用了这个方法，可惜他们没有对竞技场的组队玩法这么做。

Nimble Quest(from toucharcade.com)

融合

《Clash of Clans》中的Clan Castle必须重建才能体验到部落玩法，游戏的其他部分，无论是主题上还是机制上都体现了这一点。Clan Castle的废墟也起到了刺激玩家解锁部落玩法的作用，因为玩家会修复它，使它不影响部落的市容。

正如前面提到的，竞技场只是主菜单中的一个选项。

奖励

在《Clash of Clans》中，重建Clan Castle能获得成就（奖励花真钱的玩家）。

然而，《Nimble Quest》中的竞技场事实上要求玩家突破两道门槛（见下文）。

好处

显而易见，在《Clash of Clans》中解锁Clan Castle使玩家能玩到合作玩法。这是一个非常强大的动机，迎合了人类的心理需求——群居性动物在集体中的存在感和威望。

然而，在《Nimble Quest》中，玩家不清楚竞技场是组队玩的，因此解锁它的愿望并不强烈——游戏内没有任何信息（奖励、声望、好友互动等）刺激玩家尝试一下竞技场。

尽管这两款游戏在类型和玩法上存在差异，但你可以看得出，《Clash of Clans》将组队玩法融入游戏的方方面面，突出其重要性，不仅使玩法本身很吸引人，甚至使解锁这个玩法也变得吸引人。

目标

即使游戏过程是无止境的，也仍然需要一些类似叙述的东西为游戏提供一个背景和目标。这有助于设计玩家的进度和消费行业——否则长期留存率就很难达到了。

这种主题性的元素不会拖累游戏体验，也不太费成本。例如，在Halfbrick的《Jetpack Joyride》中，在每一回合的开始，Barry都会从“不要偷窃”的符号旁边取出一个喷气背包——既简单又方便。当然，要展示，不要讲述。

jetpack-joyride(from insidemobileapps)

然而，在《Nimble Quest》的指南关卡中，玩家并不清楚为什么能通关。这个游戏的幻想世界没有提供一个相应背景下的目标（也就是，拯救公主），就像一块没有加馅料的馅饼。

竞技场的门槛

竞技场和公会玩法的门槛简直是多余：

1、玩家要进入竞技场，必须先达到某个等级。

2、玩家每一次想玩竞技场中的比赛，都要花费真钱。尽管在《Nimble Quest》的防御中，玩家开始游戏有少量真钱，并且在游戏过程中能挣到更多钱。

3、玩家在比赛中控制的角色是由游戏随机选择的。如果被选择的角色在单人模式中还没解锁，则玩家就必须回到单人模式玩，直到把该角色解锁了才能回到比赛中；或者选择支付1.99美元马上解锁；再或者重开比赛，寄希望于不要分到未解锁的角色。

一旦解锁竞技场，玩家就应该得到奖励，而不是在这个粘性很高、病毒性传播力很强的玩法上再设置两道障碍。永远不要让玩家得很难在游戏中搞社交或邀请朋友一起玩，这包括不要太强调付钱。

《Nimble Quest》是一款容易上手又有趣的游戏，但以上问题拖了它的后腿，特别是强制循环和竞技场玩法。我会继续关注《Nimble Quest》的表现，以及它的开发者如何通过更新来促进游戏的表现。（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）

Guest Post: Analyzing the stickiness in Nimble Quest

by Kevin Oke

NimbleBit, creators of Tiny Tower and Pocket Planes, released their latest title the aptly named Nimble Quest at the end of March. While it’s a fun game, I’ve found four key issues described below that I believe limit its stickiness and in turn, its ability to monetize.

According to AppData, after a strong start peaking at No. 6 on the top free iPhone apps chart for the games genre, it has slid to No. 217 as of this writing. Its rank on the top grossing iPhone apps chart for the games genre is at No. 190. These positions may be at least partially attributable to the issues I found.

The Compulsion Loop

This is the biggest barrier for Nimble Quest to overcome. The nature of its compulsion loop makes for a very grind heavy experience that hinders its stickiness.

It’s a rule of thumb in game design that the shorter the loop, the more addictive the experience. By analyzing the loop (diagram above), one can see that unless the player is willing to spend hard currency, they have to restart from the beginning every time. The variable session length nature of the game means that as the player and their friends improve, it takes more and more time for them to challenge their ever-increasing high scores.

Essentially Nimble Quest is banking on players getting invested enough in leaderboard competition to start paying once the grind becomes too much to bear. This is a risky hook to rely on here, as it’s one that is much better suited to games with more of a sense of permanence and ownership, like city builders and strategy games such as Kingdoms of Camelot by Kabam. The reason being that without such permanence, it’s much easier for the player to decide to quit when the grinding gets tiresome.

As in any freemium game leveraging the player’s time for money, if the player tires of the grind too quickly and churns out, they can’t be monetized. However Nimble Quest is especially at risk here because of their compulsion loop. Fixed session lengths with level progression and difficulty determined by a party XP level would have provided more stickiness.

Arena Surfacing & Messaging

The Arena houses team-based gameplay uses a guild system. This is a great hook for stickiness and monetization. However clarity and surfacing around the Arena is not as good as it could be. In short, the Arena doesn’t feel important to my experience as a player, the benefit to me is not clear as a new player. Therefore it’s not compelling. Compare the surfacing and messaging of team-based gameplay in Nimble Quest versus Clash of Clans:

Surfacing

In Clash of Clans the Clan Castle is always is part of the gameplay screen, tempting the player and reinforcing its important role in the game.

The Arena is just a menu option only seen on the main menu, and not surfaced as part of Nimble Quest’s compulsion loop.

Although the team-based nature of the Arena is mentioned in the app store description, developers can’t expect players to read the description or even skim it. Screenshots are the best selling tool, so overlaying text on them to surface key selling points is effective. NimbleBit did this, but chose not to highlight the Arena or its team-based nature in any of them.

Integration

The fact that the Clan Castle in Clash of Clans needs to be rebuilt to access clan gameplay ties it in with the rest of the game, both thematically and in terms of mechanics. That the Clan Castle is in ruins also provides another more subtle motivation to unlocking clan gameplay, as players will fix it so it’s no longer an eyesore spoiling their village.

As previously stated, the Arena is simply an option in the main menu.

Reward

In Clash of Clans there is an achievement tied to rebuilding the Clan Castle (that rewards the player with hard currency).

Whereas unlocking the Arena in Nimble Quest actually leads the player to two more gates to open (I break this down a little later on).

Benefit

It’s very clear in Clash of Clans that unlocking the Clan Castle allows the player to engage in cooperative gameplay — this is a very powerful motivational hook that ties into our psychological need as humans to belong, and derive meaningful existence and prestige from membership in a group.

However in Nimble Quest it’s not clear to the player that the Arena is team-based, therefore the motivation to unlock it is lowered — there isn’t any teaser information in-game about why the player should progress onward to unlock the Arena (rewards, prestige, the chance to play with friends, etc.).

Regardless of the differences in genre and gameplay between the two games, you can see how Clash of Clans’ deeper integration and surfacing of team-based gameplay makes not only the gameplay itself, but the unlocking of it so compelling.

Goals

Even if a game is endless, it still needs some semblance of narrative to provide context and a goal. These help to frame the player’s progress and spending — otherwise long-term retention is more difficult to achieve.

Such thematic elements don’t have to bog down the experience or be costly to implement either. For example in Jetpack Joyride by Halfbrick, at the start of every run Barry bursts through the wall and takes a jetpack next to a “Do not steal” sign – – a fantastically simple, quick exposition that sets the scene. Show, don’t tell.

However in Nimble Quest, as a new player it’s not clear on an aspirational level why I’m progressing through the levels. The fantasy-based world not being paired with a goal within that context (e.g. rescue the princess) feels like a half-baked cake, game design-wise.

Arena Gating

The gating around the Arena and guild play is simply excessive:

Accessing the Arena requires the player to first reach a certain level.

Every time the player wants to play a match in the Arena, it costs them hard currency. Although in Nimble Quest’s defense, the player does start the game with a small amount of hard currency, and can earn more in gameplay.

The player’s character that they will control for the match is chosen randomly by the game. If the chosen character hasn’t yet been unlocked in the single player game, the player either has to keep playing the single player mode to unlock that character and then come back, pay $1.99 to unlock them right away, or come back when the tournament resets and hope the next featured character is one they already have.

Once unlocking the Arena, the player should be rewarded, not put through another two hoops to access such a potentially sticky feature, and one that will spur the player on to invite their friends to play. Never make it hard for the player to be social or viral, and that includes putting up pay walls.

Nimble Quest is charming, easy to grasp, and fun to play. However the problems above hinder it, especially the compulsion loop and surfacing and messaging around the Arena. I’ll be keeping a close eye both on Nimble Quest’s performance and how NimbleBit approaches updates to the game going forward.（source:insidemobileapps)