作者：Chelsey Webster

引子

奖励是一切游戏中的重要特征，因此是可见于所有游戏类型的元素。奖励的形式和大小多种多样，如果奖励得当，就能够极大增加玩家的游戏乐趣，激励他们继续玩游戏。

奖励甚至可以让玩家去做一些他们原本并不想做，或者不喜欢做的事情。许多玩家仍然会为了奖励而做一些无趣枯燥的事情。这种让玩家去做违背自己意愿的事情足以证明奖励的威力。它们是设计师的重要工具。

设计奖励结构

奖励不应该只是心血来潮的产物，而应该富有结构和计划。以下图表就是根据马斯洛需求层次而调整的奖励结构。

heirarchy_what_goes_where(from gamecareerguide)

从上图可看出，每个环节都是上一层的基础，而上一层又总比下一层更强大。如果有某个环节缺失了，上一层次也就不复存在。所以在设计奖励结构时，应该从最底层开始自下而上地动工，以便得到稳定的结构。这也是每个层次需要环环相扣的原因所在。越高级的层次，其奖励频率就要越大。这里应该采用碎片模式（游戏邦注：例如，10个小奖励=1个大奖励，10个大奖励=1个核心奖励）。当然这并不需要严格的碎片化，但小奖励的数量要超过大奖励，以此类推。

我们越往上层走，其奖励就会更趋于有形。最底层的奖励对玩家来说最基础和内在性——玩家体验。而在这个金字塔顶端的奖励，则完全是装饰性的，并且无法脱离底层奖励而存在，尽管它能够强化底层的奖励。我们可以用一杆步枪的射程为例，如果它射程大，那么这杆枪就很棒，但前提是要有这杆枪才行。

我们将在下文中介绍每个层次及其奖励的内容。此处所举例子常见于冒险或RPG游戏，但其原则适用于任何游戏题材。奖励结果应该根据自下而上的重要性进行设计。

奖励玩家体验

在考虑其他细节之前，一定要先完善玩家体验。优秀玩法和沉浸感一定要贯穿游戏机制、美术设计和UI（包括关键的玩家反馈）。我们很难定义这个环节是否已经实现，因为趣味属于只可意会不可言传的东西。一定要让玩家享受在游戏中逗留的乐趣。《侠盗猎车手》（GTA）系列在这方面就表现良好——游戏中没有设定目标，也没有奖励（事实上玩家还会因为丢失弹药和支付医药费而受到惩罚），但人们还是乐此不疲，因为其游戏玩法/机制本身就已经如此有趣和具有内在奖励性。极少有游戏的趣味能够到达这种境界——让人们不祈求任何奖励而自愿玩游戏。也许这正是GTA如此成功的原因。

核心和长期奖励

完善玩家体验之后，就要考虑其核心/长期奖励。这是玩家所获得的最大奖励。这方面的例子包括主要情节开发、开启新内容的主要里程碑（例如在GTA中进入一个新岛屿），或者获得一个新游戏机制，例如《Crash Bandicoot 3》每一场boss战后出现的机制。由于这些是玩家所得到的最大有形奖励，并将影响其内在体验，因此只能让它们偶尔出现。这可以保证它们的价值，避免干扰玩家。如果人们每隔10分钟就能得到一项新技能，他们迟早会抓狂的，因为他们根本来不及学习新技能。

主要和中期奖励

这可以是升级、完成任务、获得大量XP或金钱等。这些奖励对当时的玩家来说很重要，但并不是可以永久保存的奖励。它们本身就极具奖励性，但也意味着它们会走向终结，并最终被他物替代或者变得多余。

短期和次要奖励

这些小型、频繁的奖励本身并不会给玩家带来多大好处，但可以整合成一个大奖励。这方面的例子包括搜集某项道具，小数额的金钱/XP以打败敌人，或者完成某个任务中的一个环节。主要奖励意味着更大的终结，次要奖励则意味着小规模的终点（即走向主要/中期奖励）。

装饰性奖励

这是最后考虑的一个环节。在这个阶级的最高层，它们只有纯装饰性功能，只能作为玩家进程的一个视觉测量指标。在某些情况下，它们只有信息量，例如显示在屏幕上的得分数据，在《质量效应》中的小队选择屏幕。

另一方面，揭开地图或填充进度条等视觉进程元素可以积极鼓励玩家去做原本可能不会去做的事情。玩家可能会因为看到自己的经验条接近于升级水平时，就会再多玩10分钟的游戏。如果不是看到成就挑战，他们可能不会试图以1颗手榴弹放倒10个敌人来挽回局面；如果没揭开地图，他们可能就不会跑遍整个区域。

虽然移除这些装饰性奖励后，游戏可能仍然具有趣味，但它们却可以增强玩家体验，因为玩家可以从中看到自己的表现情况。视觉奖励有助于玩家猜测和预期所得的回报，这是一个不容忽视的激励因素。视觉奖励从来不会真正影响进程或游戏的其他任何层面。

玩家反馈（它出现于最底层次）与装饰性奖励（位于最顶端）之间的界线模糊。玩家反馈是用户沟通交流的关键，但装饰性奖励则可独立存在，或者融入玩家反馈丰富视觉效果。这两者的一个明显区别在于，忽略玩家反馈可能会破坏游戏，或者至少打破沉浸感。例如，看到你的虚拟角色在游戏世界中移动时，如果它只是简单地飘浮在地表上，这就会彻底打破沉浸感，让许多玩家大失兴趣。《湮灭》和《辐射3》中都曾出现类似问题。其中的虚拟角色确实会移动，但沿对角线奔跑时的方向与动作却并不一致，所以角色看起来像是浮在地面上。在玩第三人称游戏时，这种情况会彻底破坏沉浸感。

虽然我们是自下而上设计奖励层次，但玩家通常是自上而下体验这种结构。他们会先看到装饰性元素和次要奖励，例如获得一个任务（这是他们原本就有的奖励），之后就是收集道具和XP这种次要奖励，这会引向一个更大的奖励（通过完成任务或升级而获得），最后是得到新机制或解琐新世界等核心奖励。

成功游戏的例子

这个层级包括《魔兽世界》中的奖励。

heirarchy_wow(from gamecareerguide)

以上仅选取游戏中的部分奖励内容，但很显然这款游戏每个关卡的奖励都很丰富。其游戏世界和玩法极富沉浸感，玩家体验（职业、专长、PVP/PVE、RP等）的定制化程度也如此之高，这意味着它一款游戏就结合了成百上千种玩家体验。

各类无限量供应的奖励都会相互关联，并集合起来引向更大的奖励。而在其最顶端却是一个装饰性的随机奖励。即使是最无趣的怪兽也可能随机而罕见地掉落特大奖励。玩家在游戏中总能找到继续玩下去的理由，从各方面来看这都是一个极为强大的奖励结构。

失败游戏的案例

我曾为了自己的论文而制作了一款非常简单的2D太空射击游戏。虽然它很适合作为试验品并且能够得出相应结论，但其游戏本身在现实世界中却并不受欢迎。在开发了这种奖励结构后，我决定将其运用于我的游戏：

dis_game_heirarchy(from gamecareerguide)

游戏的顶端很强大，但越往下走越脆弱。这种游戏在今天的市场上毫无立足之地，无论其顶端结构究竟有多好，因为其底层结构并不完整。由于游戏玩法缺乏生气，这整个环节都丢失了。紧凑的时间和有限的资源意味着游戏需关注可以快速而轻易创造的有形奖励。因为我没有时间去创造出色的玩法，这款游戏仅仅是可以运行而已。

我们很容易将这款游戏与70年代的流行街机游戏进行对比。后者在当时很成功，尽管它们包含出现于积分排行榜前列的长期奖励——但它们的主要吸引力却在于怀旧风格。当今的游戏拥有更为复杂的玩法和奖励结构，所以这样一款游戏根本就没有竞争力。

让我们看看，如果《魔兽世界》丢失了一个层次会怎样：

heirarchy_section_removal(from gamecareerguide)

从上图可知，去掉这个层次后，整个层级不再可行。例如，升级增量没了，玩家就得用刷任务的方法从第1级升至90级。玩家会一直很弱，并在紊乱的一段时间后突然变得无比强大。他们需要999亿点XP才能升到下一级，在玩家每击败一个敌人只能获得20点XP的情况下，这种目标真令人沮丧。

移除这个层次完全削弱了下层奖励的价值。次要和视觉奖励对下一轮目标的作用甚至小，所以根本感觉不出其中的奖励性。玩家感到自己的目标是确实何行之时才会更乐意玩游戏。

总结

质量并不等于数量，但每个层次至少要有一个奖励。要满足每个层次的奖励，确保它们集合成另一个更大的奖励。虽然这个结构还没有进行大规模试验，但遵循这种做法却可以让你的游戏实现强大、结构分明、有益的玩家体验。

在设计奖励结构时运用这一模型，可以确保游戏拥有扎实的根基，并且令玩家获得良好的感觉，从而让他们持续在游戏中逗留。（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 Hierarchy of Needs for Rewards in Games

[Chelsey Webster explains how a skillfully implemented reward structure can enhance a player's experience and make a game more enjoyable throughout.]

Introduction

Rewards are an important feature of any game, and as such, can be found everywhere across all genres. Rewards can come in any shape or size, and when given to the player appropriately can greatly increase their enjoyment of a game, motivating them to continue to play.

Rewards can even have a player do something that they don’t want to do, or don’t enjoy doing (which is quite opposite of the purpose of playing a game). Many players will do annoying, tedious or boring things for rewards. The ability to have a player do what they dislike of their own volition attests to their power. They are an essential tool to a designer.

Designing Reward Structures

Rewards shouldn’t be included on a whim; they must be scheduled and structured. The following diagram is a hierarchy of needs, adapted for reward structures.

Fig 1: Hierarchy of Rewards in Games

Based on Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, each section is a prerequisite to the one above, and can greatly enhance the one below. If a section is missing, however, those above it become ineffective.

When designing a reward structure, it is important to work from the bottom of the hierarchy upwards to achieve a solid foundation. It is therefore important that each section is linked to the next.

The higher up in the hierarchy, the more frequently the reward should be distributed; a fractal-like pattern should emerge (i.e. 10 minor rewards = 1 major reward, 10 major rewards = 1 core reward). It doesn’t have to be strictly fractal of course, but minor rewards should considerably outnumber major rewards, and so on.

As we move upwards through the hierarchy, rewards become less intrinsic/more tangible. The bottom of the hierarchy is the most fundamental and intrinsic of rewards to the player – the player experience. At the other end of the scale, the top is purely cosmetic and cannot exist without the rewards listed below – however it works to enhance those below. Think of a scope for a rifle. The scope is great, and makes the gun much better; but it is completely worthless without the gun.

The following gives an overview of each section of the hierarchy and what kind of rewards may be found therein. Examples here will often be of the kind found in adventure or RPG games, but the principles can be applied to any genre. The rewards structure should always be designed in order of importance – from bottom to top.

Rewarding Player Experience:

Before considering anything else in detail, the player experience must be perfected. Good gameplay and immersion must first be obtained through the mechanics, aesthetics and UI (including essential player feedback). It is difficult to define whether this section is fulfilled, as fun is something that can only be experienced. The player must enjoy simply playing around with the game. The Grand Theft Auto franchise achieves this very well – who hasn’t switched it on, then ignored the missions and started wreaking havoc until they’re killed? There is no set goal to this, no rewards given (in fact the player is punished by losing ammo and paying hospital bills), but people do it because the gameplay/mechanics themselves are so much fun and intrinsically rewarding. Few games are fun to the extent that a person will play them with no prospect of rewards at all. Perhaps this is why GTA is so successful.

Core and Long Term Rewards:

Once the player experience is perfected, consider the core/long term rewards. These are very big rewards that the player will have forever. Examples include major plot developments, major milestones in opening new content (reaching a new island in Grand Theft Auto for example), or receiving a new game mechanic, such as those given after every boss fight in Crash Bandicoot 3. As these are the biggest tangible rewards that the player will receive and can affect the intrinsic experience, they should be given only occasionally. This retains their value and prevents annoying the player. People would become frustrated if they earned a new ability every 10 minutes; they’d never learn how to play.

Major and Mid Term Rewards:

These may be levelling up, completing quests, gaining large quantities of XP or money, etc. These rewards are significant to the player at the time but are not end rewards that are kept forever.

They are very rewarding in themselves, but are also means to and end and will eventually be overwritten, replaced or become redundant.

Short Term and Minor Rewards:

These are small, frequent rewards which on their own do not benefit the player, but accumulate towards a bigger reward. Examples include collecting an item, small amounts of money/XP for defeating an enemy, or completing a stage in a mission. Just as Major rewards are means to a bigger end, Minor rewards are also means to an end on a smaller scale (the end being major/mid term rewards).

Cosmetic Rewards:

This is the final section to be considered. At the top of the hierarchy, they are purely cosmetic, serving only as a visual measure of the player’s progress. In some cases they are simply informative, such as numbers appearing on screen when you add to your score, or the squad selection screen in Mass Effect – the player can guess that they’re about halfway through when they’ve filled half of their squad slots.

On the other hand, visual progress elements such as unveiling a map or filling a bar can actively encourage players to do things that they would not do otherwise, as can achievements depending on design. A player might play for 10 minutes longer where they would have otherwise stopped because their XP bar shows them how close they are to levelling up. They may not attempt to round up and defeat 10 enemies with 1 grenade if there was not an achievement challenging them to do so, and may not just run around the entire area if they weren’t revealing their map.

While a game can still be enjoyable if the cosmetic rewards are removed, they will enhance the player experience as players like to see how they’re doing. Visual rewards are vital in helping the player to gauge and anticipate rewards which is an encouraging motivator. Visual rewards never actually affect progress or any other aspect of the game at all.

There is a blurred line between the player feedback (mentioned at the bottom of the hierarchy), and cosmetic rewards (at the top). Player feedback is essential communication to the player, but cosmetic rewards can exist on their own (as with achievements, etc), or tie into player feedback for visual enrichment. One big difference between the two is that omitting essential player feedback can be game breaking, or at least break immersion. An example of essential feedback is seeing your avatar animate as you move around in the world. if it simply floated across the landscape this would completely break immersion and make it unplayable to many players. A problem like this is found to an extent in Oblivion and Fallout 3 (3rd person). The avatar animates but not it doesn’t match its direction if running diagonally, so the character appears to float around. When playing in 3rd person this can completely break immersion. You can see an example of this here.

While it should be designed bottom up, the player will often experience much of this hierarchy from a top down perspective. They will experience cosmetic elements and minor rewards to begin, such as obtaining a task (this is where they are initially given the prospect of rewards), then minor rewards such as collecting items and XP, which lead to major rewards earned by completing the quest or levelling up, and eventually core rewards such as a new mechanic or unlocking a new world.

Application to a successful game:

This hierarchy includes rewards featured in World of Warcraft, a very popular (and notoriously addictive) game.

Fig 2: A Basic reward structure of World of Warcraft

(does not include all rewards)

These are just a selection of the rewards offered, but it is clear that the game is abundant in rewards on every level. The world and the gameplay are immersive and such high customisation of the player experience (classes, specialisations, PVP/PvE, RP, and so on) means there are hundreds of player experience combinations in one game.

Add to this the limitless supply of rewards of all kinds which all tie in to one another and accumulate towards something. Then, to top it off it is peppered with random chance rewards. Even the most mundane creature can drop disproportionately powerful rewards on very rare occasions. There is always a reason to keep playing; this is clearly a very strong reward structure in every aspect.

Application to an unsuccessful game:

As part of an experiment for my dissertation I created a very simple 2D space shooter game. Though it was fit for the purpose of an experiment on rewards and yielded conclusive results, the game would not be popular or successful in the real world. After developing this hierarchy I decided to apply it to my game:

Fig 3: Reward structure of a basic 2D space shooter

The game is strong at the top and gets weaker as we get to the fundamentals of the hierarchy. There is no hope for this game on the market today no matter how good the upper sections are, because the lower sections are not fulfilled. As well as gameplay being lacklustre, an entire section is missing. Tight time and resource limitations meant that the game focused on tangible rewards which could be created quickly and easily. There was no time to invest in excellent gameplay; it just had to work.

It is easy to draw a comparison between this game and popular arcade games from the 70′s. These were successful in their day, though they did include the long term reward of top slot on the leaderboards – but today their main appeal is arguably nostalgia. Todays games have far more sophisticated gameplay and reward structures, so a game like this cannot compete.

Consider the World of Warcraft hierarchy if a section is missing:

Fig 4: World of Warcraft’s reward structure with a section removed.

With this section missing, the hierarchy doesn’t make much sense. Level increments are gone, for example, so now the player must go from level 1 to level 90 (or whatever its new name would be) in one grind. The player would be consistently weak and the suddenly immensely powerful, but only after an inordinate amount of time. Needing  999,000,000,000 XP to reach the next/last level is far too discouraging when the player is getting 20XP per enemy, even more so when their XP bar never seems to budge. Bitesized chunks are essential.

The removal of this section has completely devalued those above. The minor and visual rewards contribute so little to the next goal that they don’t feel very rewarding at all. Players are much happier and more likely to play if they feel that their goal is realistically obtainable.

Summary

Quality does not equal quantity, but it is important to have at the very least one reward in each section. Aim to fulfil each section of this hierarchy to a high standard and ensure that they accumulate towards one another. Though it has not been around long enough to be tried and tested on a large scale, following this structure should achieve a strong, structured, rewarding player experience.

While many of the examples throughout this article are based on action adventure/RPG type games, they can be applied across any genre, from puzzle games to sports and racing. By applying this model when designing a reward structure, the designer can ensure that the game has solid foundations and is rewarding enough to make the player feel good. This can ultimately keep them playing the game. （source：gamecareerguide）