作者：Josh Bycer

几周前，People Can Fly工作室联合创始人Adrian Chmielarz写了一篇有关近来的游戏设计和视觉效果相分离的文章。

从本质上来看，这是指电子游戏图像和音频已经超出了游戏设计的范围。这种变化将导致玩家脱离游戏体验，并在某种程度上促使游戏变得更加一般化。在AAA级游戏开发中，这种分离更加明显。而我将在本篇文章中阐述过去20几年玩游戏时所注意到的一些重要内容。

子弹/刀剑/火等等：

电子游戏中的生命值是一个非常抽象的理念：不管是红心，条框，数值还是屏幕上闪烁的红光。每一种方法都能够提示玩家在死之前自己遭到了多少伤害。

但是因为拥有这么多不同的代表，生命值总是很难体现出现实性。是否有人愿意跟我解释《Doom》中的第一个急救包是如何治疗咬痕，火箭发射所造成的伤害或者枪击重创？或者在《生化奇兵》中，来自垃圾桶的食物将如何治愈重伤？

早前，因为游戏在一开始就不具有现实性，所以我们才抛弃了现实形式的生命值表达。有些游戏则采取额外的步骤要求玩家使用其它道具或食物去治疗重大伤害。

举个例子来说吧，《合金装备3》设有完整的医疗系统，要求玩家通过吃东西去避免饥饿并恢复生命值。而使用各种医疗道具去治愈重大创伤能够帮助玩家最大程度地恢复生命值。

讽刺的是，最不现实的科幻游戏却对于治疗机制拥有最合理的解释，即关于魔法药剂。当然了，没人知道为什么喝掉红色药剂能够获得治愈，但是这种方法却也存在于其它游戏中。

当着眼于桌面或基于笔和纸的游戏时，设计师认为生命值是关于人们健康的抽象总结。所以被刀砍伤便意味着人们的身体状况将急剧下降，鲜血直流，或者被火球砸中将引起重度烧伤。而“治疗”便是去解决所谓的伤害。

因为在过去十年里，电子游戏图像不断向现实照片而发展，所以生命值系统也突显于更多游戏体验中。就像解释《使命召唤》中的士兵是如何在隐藏了10秒后从枪击重创中恢复过来。

Doom3Gamespy（from game-wisdom）

并且随着技术的发展，即使《Doom》系列游戏从未涉及现实生命值或战斗，但却仍能够带给玩家很大的乐趣。

还有一个更具游戏化的理念便是生命值升级。现在有些游戏中的角色可以凭借足够的经验或找到更多道具去抵挡子弹的攻击。

至少在科幻背景中的游戏可以使用技术术语或纳米机器做到这点。

有些游戏则通过突出静态和自动生成生命值系统去做到这点：基于让角色能够摆脱基本伤害的系统，但是必须在受到更大伤害的时候才能复原。《星际传奇》便是一个典型的例子，不过我们却发现做出这一选择的游戏并不多。

与此同时我们也不能漏掉敌人。电子游戏中的逻辑规定，你在邪恶组织中的地位越高，你便越能抵御伤害。

当你在抗击人类boss，并且他还能抵御子弹的攻击时，你便能够感受到这种乐趣。有些游戏想要通过让玩家穿上盔甲或变强壮去解释这一点，但不管怎样子弹击中身体是不可抹灭的事实。

在我们所讨论的这5大游戏设计谬论中，生命值应该是最复杂的一个元素。可以说游戏的平衡和设计很大程度是依赖于生命值系统。所以我们需要进行一定的实验并相对地改变设计。

几年前我为一款恐怖游戏想出了一个关于不同类型的生命值系统的理念。比起让玩家摆脱重大伤害，他们可以凭借自己的毅力而躲避致命攻击。不过当玩家的毅力耗尽之时，他们便难以抵挡住下一个致命攻击了。

而现在去阅读那最后一段内容会觉得，系统就像是一个传统的生命值指标。但是不同之处便在于生命值系统更加侧重现实性。也许这听起来并不是多么重要，但是如此轻微的触动都有可能减少生命值系统的游戏化。

（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）

5 Realistic Fallacies in Game Design: Health

By Josh Bycer

A few weeks ago, game designer Adrian Chmielarz who was a co-owner of the studio People Can Fly, wrote a piece on Gamasutra regarding the disconnect between visuals and game design these days.

Essentially how video game art and audio have grown beyond the scope of game design. Giving us cases where games look and sound realistic, but fall back on gamey tropes. This in turn pulls the gamer out of the experience and in a way makes the game generic. This kind of disconnect has become apparent in AAA game development. For this series I want to take a look at some of the major ones I’ve noticed after spending over twenty years playing games.

The Bullet/Sword/Fire/etc Sponge:

Health in video games has always been an abstract concept: from hearts, a bar, numbers and even just the screen flashing red. Each method was designed to give the player an idea of how much damage they could sustain before dying.

However for having so many different representations, health has never been realistic. Would anyone care to explain to me how a first aid kit in Doom could repair bite marks, rocket launcher damage or shotgun blasts? Or how in Bioshock Infinite,  food from trash cans could repair damage?

Since the early days, we have brushed off defining health in a realistic form as games were never realistic to begin with. Some games went the extra step and required the player to use a secondary item to heal major damage or aliments.

Metal Gear Solid 3 for instance had a full medic system that required the player to eat food to keep their hunger down and regenerate health on its own. Along with treating major injuries with various medical items to restore the player’s maximum health.

Ironically, fantasy games, which were the most unrealistic had the most rational explanation for healing: magic potions. Sure, no one knew how drinking a red potion would heal you, but it still made more sense then what we’ve seen in other games.

When looking at table-top or pen and paper games, designers explained health as an abstract sum of the person’s well being. So that being cut by a sword meant that the person had a nasty cut that was bleeding out, or a fireball caused severe burn damage. And the act of “healing” was performing any tasks related to curing said damage.

Since the last decade as video game graphics have expanded to be near photo-realisistic, the health system has stood out all the more from the experience. Care to explain how soldiers in Call of Duty recover from gun-shot wounds by hiding for 10 seconds?

Even as the technology improved, the Doom series was never about realistic health or combat but was fun nonetheless.

An even gamier concept is the act of health upgrades. Now we have characters who after enough experience or finds enough items, can withstand bullets even more.

At least games in a Sci-Fi setting can waive it off with techno-babble or nano-machines.

Some games try to work around this by featuring both static and auto regenerative health systems: To base the system around the character shrugging off basic damage, but needing to recover from more pressing damage. The Chronicles of Riddick was an example , but we don’t see too many games go this option and instead choose one or the other.

But while talking about the player is pretty gamey, we can’t ignore the enemies. Video game logic dictates that the higher up you are in an evil organization, the more resistant to damage you apparently become.

This becomes unintentinally funny when you fight boss enemies who are human and can somehow resist bullets to the face. Some games try to explain this as the character was wearing body armor or was strong, but once again a bullet to the face is a bullet to the face.

Of the five we’re going to talk about, health is the one that stands out as the hardest element to move a way from. So much of a game’s balance and design relies on the health system in place. That to try something experimental would require a radical change in design.

A few years ago I came up with the concept for a different kind of health system for a horror game. Where instead of the player shrugging off major damage, they would instead automatically dodge fatal attacks costing them stamina. If the player ran out of stamina the next fatal attack would connect.

Now, reading that last paragraph the system sounds just like a traditional health meter. However the difference was that health system was grounded more in reality. It may not sound like a big deal, but little touches like that could reduce the gameyness of a health system.

But as we’re going to talk about over the next four days, it’s not just one issue that needs to be looked at, but several.(source:game-wisdom)