游戏邦在:
杂志专栏:
gamerboom.com订阅到鲜果订阅到抓虾google reader订阅到有道订阅到QQ邮箱订阅到帮看

Warren Spector谈对游戏行业趋势的看法

发布时间:2013-09-12 14:54:26 Tags:,,

作者:Patrick Miller

在11月份的游戏开发者大会(GDC)开幕以前,GDC在线社区总监Patrick Miller就游戏业的未来,采访了多位游戏业领军人物。

在游戏这个年轻的行业里,极少有开发者的经验能与Warren Spector的相提并论——他参与开发的作品包括《网络奇兵》、《创世纪》、《银河飞将》、《杀出重围》、《传奇米老鼠》,等等。自然而然地,我想然知道这位元老级人物对游戏的未来有什么看法。

在本次采访中,Warren Spector谈论了游戏开发的教育、个人影响力和游戏设计对游戏行业的发展的重要性等。

Warren-Spector(from softpedia.com)

Warren-Spector(from softpedia.com)

Patrick Miller(以下简称PM):游戏行业还相当年轻,而你是少数倍受关注的游戏开发者之一,你在行业中的经验涉及多个方面。你认为你在行业中的角色正在发生什么样的变化?你认为行业给新进的游戏开发人才的待遇是否会不同于他们前辈?

Warren Spector(以下简称WS):显然,随着年纪增长、兴趣变化和能力加强,角色也随之变化。我经常说自己是仍然活跃于游戏制作领域的最老的开发者。我的意思是,可能也比我更老的人(我58岁了)还呆在这个行业,但他们大部分人不是做游戏而是管游戏。也就是说,当我说“我做游戏”时,我严重依赖更年轻一代的开发者的帮助——毕竟我的体力已经不允许我再干体力活或长时间加班了。然而,我仍然赞同这个说法:我参与制作的游戏的概念仍然是由我敲板的。当我把我的概念摆在我的团队面前时,我对最终游戏的意见比他们所有人的加起来都更有份量。

所以考虑到我不太有兴趣成为全职的管理人员,那么我对之后的职业生涯还有什么期待呢?呃,我现在比以前更向往成为行业中的导师式的人物——以己之力帮助我身后的那些年轻一代的开发者。他们当中有很多人并不需要我的帮助——或者即使他们确实需要也不想接受我的帮助,但看到Harvey Smith和Paul Weaver等人和我合作时(和离开我后)表现得那么好,真的很让人欣慰。我希望在以后做更多“拉人一把”的事。

为此,我认为最好的方式之一是,从开发领域转移,但不是转移到发行或商业,或甚至我在大约过去5年一直尝试的“放手让下面的人去做”(管理)的领域,而是教育领域。现在很多大学、学院和社区大学都开设了游戏开发课程,有些高中也有相关的课程,甚至那些童子军组织都有类似的游戏开发活动了。

我认为随着游戏媒体的成熟和开发者资历的增长,将会有更多资深开发者转向教育领域,把自己的实践经验传授给学生,而不是沿用老一套的的特定设计法来教学。我认为,行业对年轻开发者的待遇不会有太大改变,但对年老开发者的会有显著变化,我敢肯定。

PM:在我采访过的人中,你是第一个把教育当成自己的游戏开发生涯的主要方面的人。你认为游戏开发教育的现状如何?你是否建议新一届准大学生们去上游戏开发的专门学校?

WS:呃,事实上,这是我第一次在采访中谈这么多游戏行业对教育的态度。

我知道有些开发者炫耀自己出色的学术背景,但更多开发者显然认为上专门学校只是浪费时间——他们在工作中学习,通常没有上过专门大学,所以他们通常也雇用与自己有类似背景的人。甚至在那些受过较高教育的开发者当中,我有时候仍觉得自己有一点儿格格不入,因为我在有了这么深厚的行业经验后,我居然转型成为专业学者了。我只是没有博士学位罢了,所以不用说,我是高度重视教育的!

就目前的游戏教育情况,我认为水平还是参差不齐的。有些大学和学院在培养未来的美工和开发者方面做得非常好,但有些就只是混水摸鱼了(至于具体有哪些,我就不指名道姓了)。

我是否建议准大学生们报考游戏开发大学?看情况吧。如果你已经是学科当中的一把手且你非常明确游戏开发就是你一生的事业和追求,那么你就直接入行吧。但这种人可能只占全体的千分之一……至于其他人,我还是建议接受教育吧。努力成为你所选择的专业中的杰出人才,但也不要忽视人文学科(特别是心理学、经济学和历史)。另外,还要保证涉猎其他学科——程序员和美工必须知道如何与设计师合作,设计师必须知道如何与美工和程序员合作……音频设计师等人也是一样的。

我对只专注于游戏的课程的效果表示怀疑。如果你在学校只学习如何做游戏,那么你做出来的东西可能只是拼凑过去的老游戏。这对大家都不好。

所以,我认为学校在游戏专业学生的职业准备方面做得很不理想。但我还是不指名道姓了……

PM:你刚说到你的体力不能承受现在的游戏开发工作强度了;你认为这是需要改革的地方吗?你认为这种高强度的工作条件是否影响了游戏制作的过程(或游戏本身的品质)?这种压力是否过早地把年长的、有经验的开发者排挤出行业?

WS:显然,我过去可以现在也可以应付游戏开发的压力。只是随着年纪增大,应付得越来越困难了!

这能不能说与高强度有关?是否需要改变?不能一概而论。老实说,从我年轻时到中年,准确地说是接近50岁时,我还是有些享受这种高强度的工作的。当然,当(似乎总是)持续太久时,有时候确实让人崩溃。但我所知道的项目中,极少(其实是没有)是不付出额外努力就完成的。只是,当你年纪越来越大,你就会越来越难承受那样的工作强度。我就是这样的。

看吧,随着我越来越老,我发现自己迫不及待地想成为导师式的人物,你理解我的意思吧。我58了,我似乎最好与那些能承受得了压力的年轻开发者一起工作,尽我所能指导他们。注意,这不意味着我放弃开发,转型为纯管理者或经营者之类的——我只是从另一个角度从事开发,比从前更多地分享我在游戏制作方面的创意。老实说,这似乎是相当自然的职业生涯和人生历程,至少对我来说是这样的。这不是一个需要解决的问题。

PM:在行业中,我们习惯于说未来的技术将改变游戏这个媒体,但我们很少讨论未来的设计将如何影响游戏。你知道有什么人在从事前沿设计吗?你是否发现了一些新的游戏机制、亚类、理论、设计流程,等等,将重大影响未来5-10年的游戏?

WS:一直以来,我对设计的兴趣都大过技术,对体验的兴趣大过美术。我不想具体地说哪个设计师或哪家工作室(那会给我带来麻烦的!),我认为最好是放宽眼界,专注于趋势。

在有利的方面,我认为现在的独立游戏开发领域是很有意思的。有太多方法可以接触到受众——不是受众们。有趣的、创新的游戏是不可避免的。在过去,GDC的独立游戏节更像一个想引领主流的开发者会炫耀他们的作品的地方。我曾经看过那些展览,我想,“哦,太闷了——又是传统的射击游戏……啊,又一款传统的RTS。”现在的情况可不同了。当我参观独立游戏展区时,我会想,“哇,不会吧!我怎么跟这么牛逼的创意竞争?”

GDC的“实验玩法工场”(Experimental Gameplay Workshop)是另一个好例子。在这个项目中,开发者们小团队合作,努力做出不同于主流的、前所未见的游戏。

在这些先锋派游戏中,有些强调机制,有些突出剧情,有些,呃,就是致力于搞怪吧。但它们都清楚地证明了,游戏的未来不是由技术或美术决定的——技术和美术只是保证未来的游戏会更加华丽更加昂贵。设计创新才是游戏的未来。

我唯一的担忧是,独立游戏开发者(特别是独立手机游戏开发者)的工作不会打动传统的游戏开发商和发行商。到目前为止,我还没看到太多独立游戏和手机游戏对我和其他传统的AAA开发者产生什么影响(这是可悲的)。我希望情况会有所变化。

坦白说,我认为会有改观的,但不是因为年轻自大的独立游戏开发者进入主流的大公司工作……而是因为数字分配技术使他们能够接触到玩家。开发的低成本允许营销的低成本。二者相结合,意味着独立游戏将成为新的主流。至少那是我希望的。也许那只是我自欺欺人的一个梦想吧。但我希望看到行业不再一味地强调传统的游戏的成功,而是更多地关注那些小而危的游戏和开发者。

PM:你认为在以后,主流游戏玩家对游戏的期待将有什么变化?人们会更加接受那种让人产生复杂情绪而不是意绪地觉得“好玩”的游戏吗?开发者和发行商要如何应对这种趋势?

WS:我不认为是主流的游戏玩家的期待变化了,而是主流的游戏玩家本身的属性变化了。如果你只看现在的情况,你会觉得我们正在快速地向“主流玩家是唯一的受众”的时代前进。放在电影和电视领域,也是一样的。在不久的将来,所有人都会成为游戏玩家。

他们玩什么?显然,我们所谓的AAA游戏将继续存在,它们的受众是自称为“玩家”的硬核玩家。而那些玩简单的、吸引人的手机游戏的人宁可去死也不想被定位为“游戏玩家”。

但我的希望是,出现更多跨受众类型的游戏;这类游戏打破传统的游戏常规,也抛弃点击游戏浪费时间的特点。你的问题其实已经给出答案——我们必须停止把游戏当成这个星球上唯一被“一定要有‘乐趣’”定义的媒体。

开发者和发行商要为“人人是玩家”的未来做什么准备?我认为答案就相当于,理财顾问在大动乱时期给他们的客户提的建议——保持平衡。把所有鸡蛋放在一个篮子里的人——只关注一种类型的游戏、一个平台(或一类平台)、只使用一种赢利策略的人,可能会灭亡。

除了受众更多、更加多样,游戏的未来是无法确定的——除了游戏会有未来是确定的,但到底是什么样的未来,那不是你在十年或二十年前就能想到的事。

PM:你是否想到硬件?有没有什么硬件趋势或某一种设备吸引你,让你觉得应该关注的?

WS:我对手机游戏非常有兴趣。我的意思是,谁不会关注那些一夜之间积累了百万玩家的游戏平台……谁口袋里没有装一台能玩游戏的机子……十亿部设备把处于终端的人连接在一起。现在,手机就是我最热衷的硬件了。

其他东西——虚拟现实、AR、新游戏机?呃,我会想一想,但现在手机似乎更让我感兴趣。(看吧?我说的是我永远不会做的事?)

PM:有时候似乎是,好的技术和游戏想法就是没有赶上合适的时机。你认为当时机合适时,我们会看到什么东西(或者精神上继承)卷土重来?

WS:当然。回到上世纪90年代,Cybermaxx和Forte VFX1引领了一场非常浩大和VR运动。这些头戴设备能带来全面的沉浸感,但没有合格的镜片(不能阅读屏幕上的文本,太糟糕了)。这些技术远远走在它们所处的时代的前面。如果Oculus Rift不是出现得正是时候,那么它将成为历史上另一个没有突破的突破。

此外,最让我印象深刻的是Trip Hawkins的3DO。与其他当前和未来的游戏设备一样,3DO不缺钱,但太前卫——我想大多人都应该见过那种昂贵的娱乐盒子了,它提供高端的图像画面,除了游戏还有其他娱乐功能,是个好东西……比那些跃然便宜但只能玩游戏的东西更好。

PM:你和你的同行把什么(和谁)当成为灵感来源?目前有什么东西对你比较有影响、你比较欣赏?

WS:现在最流行的游戏,显然就是我们的灵感来源。电影?电视?漫画书?试试吧。

不行的,大多数的游戏的灵感来源是……其他游戏。

也许我就是愤世嫉俗吧,在主流游戏中我看不到什么大胆的、创新的或甚至有趣的东西。我看到的只是大量老菜新炒,也就是老游戏换上更好的图像(我这么一说,发行商再也不会待见我了吧……)

幸运的是,我们还有蒸蒸日上的独立游戏,那个领域的人还敢尝试新东西、不走寻常路。当然,有些独立开发者也是从早期的游戏中汲取灵感的,但他们往往是解构那些老游戏,而不是重制它们……换汤不换药。有些独立开发者正在探索新的系统、玩法和叙述手法。未来是属于这些人的!

有什么影响我?有那么一阵子,我显然是受到Walt Disney的启发!大多数时候,我是被新闻、新兴的文化思潮启发的。我一般不想劝服别人对什么东西产生兴趣——我更乐意挖掘人们已经感兴趣的东西,然后做成交互性产品。无论我的游戏看起来有多奇幻或科幻,我希望当人们玩它们时,能把一些东西带回现实世界,这才是与他们的人生和我们的世界最有关系的东西。

PM:“我希望当人们玩它们时,能把一些东西带回现实世界”?很吸引人的观点;这你要怎么设计?

WS:首先,我认为现实世界的适应性“测试”很大程度上只适用于剧情性的游戏。比如,在抽象的益智游戏中设计现实世界的适应性当然更困难得多。

假设你根据这个想法制作一款游戏,那么你就要给玩家提供关于如何与它互动的真正选项。你要给玩家展示那些选项的后果。你要构建一个不只关乎输赢或解决谜题的场景——你要构建一个玩家必须自己决定应该做什么和不应该做什么的情境。

你希望玩家在游戏世界中穿行,偶尔停下来,把手从解盘或控制器上移开,想一想自己正在做什么、为什么做、怎么做。如果你只是强迫玩家沿着预制的故事路线和/或一个挑战/解决路径走,那么这个想法就不会成功。在我看来,给玩家一个可以自由选择、有后果的世界才是伟大的胜利。

在不同时期,我曾有幸共事过的人以不同的方式表达了这个想法。我认为特别实用的是一个问题,“这个世界是否看着和回应着玩家的所做所为?”问这个问题,然后给出“正确的”答案,我认为玩家必然会思考如何把玩游戏学到的东西运用到现实世界中。很简单,对吧?未必这么简单啊……(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

What’s Next? Spector: ‘Design innovation is where the future lies’

By Patrick Miller

[Ahead of November's GDC Next, GDC's Director of Online Community Patrick Miller reached out to many games industry luminaries to see where they think the future of video games is headed. This interview is the fourth installment of a multi-part series that will run up until shortly before the 'future of games' conference, which takes place in Los Angeles, CA from November 5-7, co-located with the App Developers Conference.]

In an industry as young as ours is, few devs have the experience that Warren Spector has — or, for that matter, the resume. System Shock, Ultima, Wing Commander, Deus Ex, Epic Mickey — naturally, I wanted to know where he thought the future of games was headed.

Read on to see what Spector has to say about game dev education, multi-act careers in the industry, personal influences, and the importance of game design in the future of video games as a medium.

Patrick Miller: The games industry is relatively young, and you’re one of the few high-profile game developers who have been around long enough to really have a multiple-act career so far. How do you see your role in the industry evolving and changing? Do you think the industry’s treatment of younger up-and-coming talent will change as we see more and more veteran devs stick around?

Warren Spector: Clearly, as one gets older, interests, capabilities and, therefore, roles change. I often say I’m the oldest developer still actively involved in the creation of individual games. That is to say that there may be people older than me (I’m 58) in the industry, but most of them are running things rather than making things. To be clear, when I say “I make things,” I depend heavily on others — younger others! — to do the heavy lifting and long hours I’m not longer physically capable of doing. However, I’ll stand by the fact that I still conceptualize the games I work on and, as I put it with my teams, I have one more vote than all of them combined when it comes to the specifics of what goes into the final game.

So given that I’m not much interested in being a full-time administrator, what changes have I seen, and what do I expect to see down the road? Well, I certainly think more these days than I ever did before about the appeal of mentorship — of doing whatever I can to help the younger folks coming up behind me. A lot of them don’t need my help — and don’t want it even if they DO need it — but watching people like Harvey Smith and Paul Weaver and others do so well while working with me (and after leaving me) is really gratifying. I’d like to do more of that sort of “giving people a leg up” in the future.

One of the best ways to do that, I think, is to move from development NOT into publishing or business roles — or even into the relatively hands-off day-to-day role I’ve tried to fill over the last 5 years or so… No, the way to go, I think, is into education. There are so many game development programs out there at universities, colleges, community colleges… plus a few high schools… heck, even the Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts have game development programs in place.

I think, as the medium matures, and as developers age, you’ll see more and more of them moving into education, teaching from experience in structured ways, rather than the ad hoc approach we’ve taken to games education over the years. I don’t think you’ll see the role and treatment of younger developers change much, but the role and treatment of older developers is going to change radically, I bet.

PM: You’re the first person I’ve spoken to who mentioned education as a major aspect of your game dev career. What do you think about the state of game dev education? Would you recommend going to school specifically for game dev to, say, an incoming college freshman?

WS: Well, the fact that I’m the first to mention this probably tells you a lot about the industry’s attitude toward education!

Anyway, I know there are some developers who boast impressive academic credentials but a lot of devs (and pubs) clearly think it’s a waste of time — they learned on the job, often without the benefit of higher education, so they hire people with similar backgrounds. Even among the over-educated, I sometimes feel like a bit of an anomaly in that I came to game development after a long career as a professional student. I’m just THIS short of a Ph.D so, needless to say, I value education highly!

As far as games education in particular goes, I think it’s something of a mixed bag. There are some universities and colleges doing a great job developing the artists and team contributors of tomorrow. There are others selling snake oil. (And, no, I’m not naming names at either end of the spectrum!)

Would I recommend a game development education to a college freshman? It all depends. If you’re already one of the best of the best in your discipline and you know — absolutely know — game development is what you want to do with your life, sure, go right into industry. Okay, that takes care of one in 1000… For all the rest, I’d say get an education, for sure. Learn to be the best of the best in your chosen field but don’t neglect the liberal arts (especially psychology, economics and history). Be sure to get some exposure to the other disciplines — programmers and artists need to know how to work with designers… designers need to know how to work with artists and programmers… ditto for artists, audio folks and so on.

I’m leery of places and programs that focus exclusively or primarily on a games curriculum. If all you learn in school is how to make games, you’ll just end up rehashing the games of the past. That’s bad for everyone.

Having said all that, there are areas in which I think academia is doing a less than optimal job in preparing people for careers in gaming. But I’m going to keep those cards close to my chest for a while…

PM: You’ve mentioned that you can’t take the physical stress of game development these days; is this something you think needs changing? How have you seen typical crunch conditions affect the process of making games (or the quality of the games themselves)? Does this stress prematurely remove older devs from the business — devs with useful experience?

WS: Well, to be clear, I could — and can — handle the physical stress of development. It’s just that it’s a lot harder than it used to be!

Do I think this is related to crunch? Do I think it needs to change? No in each case. Frankly, when I was younger — up until my mid- to late-40′s actually — I kind of enjoyed crunching. Obviously, it can get out of hand when it goes on too long, which it always seems to do, but I know of very few projects (none, actually) that get made without some extra effort. It’s a fact that crunching becomes more difficult as you get older, but that’s kind of working for me, in a weird sort of way.

See, as I get older, I find myself wanting to mentor more and make less, if you see what I mean. At 58, it just seems better to work with younger, more crunch-worthy developers and help them as much as I’m able. Note that this doesn’t mean abandoning development in favor of pure management or a business role or something — it just means approaching development from a different angle, sharing the creative work of game-making even more than before. Frankly, that seems like a pretty natural career and life progression, one that very well could be specific to me, not a problem that needs to be solved.

PM: In games, we’re used to talking about what future tech will bring the medium of games, but we’re less accustomed to talking about what future design will bring. Who do you see doing cutting-edge game design work? Do you see emerging mechanics, sub-genres, theories, design processes etc. that you think will have a reverberating effect on the video games of 5-10 years from now?

WS: I’ve always been less interested in tech than in design, less in art than in experience. Rather than get into specific designers or studios, called out by name (which would just get me in trouble!), I think it’s better to take a larger view and focus on trends.

On the plus side, I think there’s incredibly interesting stuff happening in the indie world these days. The fact that there are so many ways to reach an audience — an audience, no longer the audience — interesting, innovative games are all but inevitable. Used to be, the Independent Games Festival at the Game Developers Conference was little more than a place where wannabe mainstream game developers could show off their portfolio pieces. I used to walk around that display and think, “Oh, isn’t that cute — another conventional shooter… Oh, and there’s another conventional RTS.” Today, that’s not true. I walk around the IGF area and think, “Holy Cow. Talk about creativity! How’m I going to compete against that?”

The Experimental Gameplay Workshop at GDC is another terrific example of developers, working alone or in small teams, can make games unlike anything the mainstream business would never think of greenlighting.

Some of these games are mechanics-focused, some are story-focused, some are, well, weirdness-focused. But all of them make clear that neither tech nor art defines the future of games — tech and art promise a future of prettier, more expensive games. Design innovation is where the future lies.

My only fear is that the work of the indie developers (and, to a lesser extent, mobile developers) won’t have the kind of impact on traditional games developers and publishers they should have. So far, I’m not seeing much of the indie and mobile work flowing back into the work of people (sadly) like me and other traditionally triple-A developers. I hope that changes.

Frankly, I think it will change, but not because the young whippersnappers of indie and mobile games coming to work for the big, mainstream companies…The change will come because digital distribution will allow them to reach players. The low cost of development will allow low cost of sales. And all that together will mean indies will become a new mainstream. At least that’s my hope. Maybe it’s a dream and I’m just fooling myself. But I’d love to see a de-emphasis of traditional gaming and more focus on, and success, for smaller, riskier games and developers.

PM: How do you think the mainstream game audience’s expectations of a video game will change in the future? Will people be more receptive to games that make us feel more complicated emotions than simply “entertained”? How do devs and publishers need to prepare for that?

WS: I’m not sure I see the mainstream game audience’s expectations to change so much as I see the very nature of the mainstream game audience itself to change. More to the point, if you just look at what’s going on even today, we’re rapidly moving toward the day when the mainstream audience is the only audience. In the same way everyone’s a movie-goer and TV-watcher, someday soon, everyone will be a game player.

What will they be they be playing? Clearly, there will continue to be what we think of as triple-A games, played by an audience that self-defines as “gamers.” The hardcore variety. And there will continue to be simple, compelling mobile-games, played by people who would rather die than identify themselves as gamers.

But my hope is that we’ll see the rise of games that cross audience-boundaries by leaving behind a geeky focus on traditional game conventions as well as the time-wasting characteristics of the best (or at least best-selling) swipe-swipe-tap-tap games. Your question implies its own answer — we need to stop thinking of ourselves as the only medium on the planet that is defined only by the need to be “fun” (whatever the hell that means).

What should developers and publishers do to prepare for a future where everyone is a gamer? I think the answer is exactly the same as the advice financial advisors give their clients in times of turmoil and change — maintain a balanced portfolio. Anyone who puts all their eggs in one basket, focusing on only one type of game, on one platform (or type of platform) with only one monetization scheme is probably doomed.

Other than a growing, more diverse audience, there’s nothing certain about the future of gaming — other than the fact that there will be a future, something that wasn’t as certain as you think just a decade or two ago.

PM: Is hardware on your mind at all? Are there emerging hardware trends or specific devices that have caught your eye as something specific to pay attention to?

WS: I’m hugely interested in mobile games. I mean, who wouldn’t be interested in delivering games to a platform that boasts something like a billion users, all of whom have a little game-playing device in their pockets… a billion devices all connected to one another… with real humans on either end. Now that’s some hardware I’m jazzed about.

The other stuff — VR, AR, new consoles? Meh. I’ll think about it, but mobile seems way more interesting to me right now. (See? What’d I say about ensuring I’ll never work again?…)

PM: Sometimes it seems like the best ideas in tech and games simply didn’t happen at the right time. What do you think we might see come back (perhaps a spiritual successor) once the time is right?

WS: Sure. Back in the mid-90s there was a big VR movement, led by the Cybermaxx headset and he Forte VFX1. They had full immersion, head tracking, the works. What they didn’t have was optics up to the job. (You couldn’t read any text onscreen it was so bad.) Those were way ahead of their time. It’ll be really interesting to see if Oculus Rift is coming along at the right time or, when the history is written, it’ll just be another breakthrough that didn’t break through.

Other than that, nothing’s coming to mind off the top of my head other than what Trip Hawkins was trying to do with the 3DO. Like some other current and future game devices, the 3DO was pretty much on the money, but ahead of its time — I just think everyone already sees that an expensive entertainment box, offering high-end graphics and other entertainment options beyond games is a good thing… maybe a better thing than a lower cost device that does nothing but play games.

PM: What (and who) do you and your peers look to for inspiration? What influences currently inform the your work and those you admire?

WS: Look at today’s most popular games and it’s pretty obvious what our inspirations are. Movies, you say? Uh uh. Television? Nah. Comic Books? Try again.

No, the inspiration for most games is… other games!

Maybe I’m cynical, but I don’t see a lot of daring, innovative or even interesting things in the mainstream of gaming. I do see a lot of rehashed classics with better graphics. (I love ensuring that I’ll never get work from any publisher again…)

Luckily, we have that thriving indie scene that’s doing all sorts of new and unusual things. Sure, some of the indies draw inspiration from earlier games, but they tend to deconstruct those games rather than remake them…with better graphics. And some indie developers are exploring new systems, gameplay and narrative. There’s a future for you!

What influences me? Well, for a while there, I was clearly inspired by Walt Disney! Mostly, I’m inspired by headlines, by news, by whatever happens to be floating around in the cultural zeitgeist. I tend not to want to convince people to be interested in something — I’d much rather find things they’re already interested in and give them an interactive look at that. No matter how fantastic or science fictional a game of mine may seem, I hope people take something back to the real world when they play, something that’s relevant to their lives and our world.

PM: “I hope people take something back to the real world when they play”? That’s a fascinating sentiment; how do you design for this?

WS: First, I think the real world applicability “test” applies largely to narrative games. It would certainly be much, much more difficult to design for real-world applicability in an abstract puzzle game, for example.

Assuming you’re making a game where this idea makes sense, you design for it by offering players real choices about how to interact with the world. You show them the consequences of those choices. You set up situations where it isn’t all about winning or solving a puzzle — you set up situations where players have to decide for themselves what is and isn’t the right thing to do.

You want players moving through the game world and, occasionally stopping, taking their hands off the keyboard or controller and sitting back (at least metaphorically) to think about what they’re doing, the reasons they’re doing it and the best way to do it. If you’re just forcing players down a path of pre-planned story and/or a single challenge/solution path, you’re not going to get there. But giving players freedom to choose in an option-rich, consequential world is a huge win, in my book.

At various times, the people I’ve been lucky enough to work with have expressed this idea in many ways. One I find particularly useful is the question, “Is the world watching and responding to what the player does?” Ask that question and give the “right” answer, and I think it’s inevitable that players will think about how they’d apply what they learned from playing your game a particular way to their experience of the real world. Simple, right? Not so much…(source:gamasutra)


上一篇:

下一篇: