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

游戏开发者应该勇敢地使用新工具

发布时间:2014-03-20 14:08:00 Tags:,,,,

作者:Slaton White

关于如何设计游戏存在各种各样的方法。幸运的是,我已经参与了许多项目的制作,并拥有足够的自由去尝试不同的设计方法。有些方法彻底失败了,但有些还存在着希望。在本文中我将讨论那些对于设计师的我来说非常有效的设计工具和方法。关于游戏设计,我的基本模版是:

1.想出美学理念

2.找到支持该美学理念的动态元素

3.创造能够让动态元素发挥作用的机制

4.使用互动设计去测试我的游戏理念是否与实际游戏相接近

5.从玩家的角度尝试整款游戏

6.看看哪个目标市场适合游戏

7.测试,测试,不断测试

在你开始创造游戏前,你需要先决定机制,动态元素和美学理念(也就是MDA)。通常情况下我会建议你从美学理念开始,尽管机制和动态元素总是被排在前面。我可以保证从美学理念移向动态元素和机制将对整体游戏质量和一致性更有帮助,因为我已经尝试过了。当你在考虑美学理念时,你可能会思考游戏的外观,当在此情况下这指的是当玩家在玩游戏时的感受。一旦你明确希望玩家在游戏时拥有怎样的感受时,你便清楚他们该做出哪些行动去获得这样的感受。玩家采取的行动便是动态元素。例如,假设我希望玩家感到悲伤或不幸。那么为了让玩家有这样的感受我便会让他们为了做某事而杀死一只可爱的宠物。要记得动态元素是非常广泛的行动,如升级或攻击。在你明确了动态元素后,你便可以想出机制。机制是传达行动发生时会出现什么情况的详细规则。如果说动态元素是广泛的行动,那么机制便是在玩家做这些行动时所发生的情况。让我们再次以“杀死宠物”为例,杀死你的宠物的机制可能是每次当你杀死一只宠物时,其它宠物便会获得升级。一旦我明确了MDA,我将马上创造一个原型去测试机制和动态元素是否能创造出我所预想的美学。

创造原型,测试它,记录哪些内容是成功的,以及哪些元素引出问题,然后创造一个新原型去解决那些问题,这便是所谓的迭代设计。它包含了一些科学方法:

1.想出一个原型

2.尝试该原型并进行测试

3.记录数据

4.着眼于数据以确保它能够支持整体的MDA并记录引起它失败的问题

5.创造一个新原型去解决这些问题

作为游戏设计师,迭代设计是我最喜欢的解决问题与测试新理念的方法。最后,虽然我会思考所有我想要添加的某种机制将呈现给玩家的效果,但只有在真正执行并测试它时才会更加清楚它能做什么。尽管看起来摆脱其它制作元素需要花费许多时间,但最终它将带来巨大的帮助。当你在设计并创造你所确定的游戏版本的原型,或至少是游戏某一部分时,这将用于之后的制作过程。这让你的团队能够相互合作而更快速地进行制作,并且最终原型也能够巩固你的团队。如果团队或团队成员未曾有效共事的话这便非常有帮助。从长期来看,他们可能将学会如何在原型上而不是一个优化版本上进行相互合作。迭代设计将是非常有帮助的工具,但如果缺少玩家同感,你便永远不可能真正使用它。

玩家同感是通过玩家的角度(而非那些了解游戏的人)去看待并玩游戏的能力。这是你作为游戏设计师能够使用的最重要的工具,因为在任何时候你所认为的玩家会做的事可能会与他们实际上做的截然相反。出于这一原因,你必须确保自己能够从全新的角度去看待谜题和关卡。你是如何做到这点其实就是一种角色扮演形式。例如,我正在创造一款休闲游戏,而现在我正尝试着去想出一个控制方案和机制。在某些情况下,我认为一个真正优秀的控制方案应该是第一人称射击游戏中的那样。所以通过方向键去移动角色,使用鼠标去访问并朝不同方向射击。现在我会问自己,如果我是最典型的休闲益智游戏玩家,我是否能够知道这一控制方案,并且是否会使用它?如果我不能立刻意识到FPS控制方案对于特定游戏类型来说太过复杂,我也不确定休闲玩家真正习惯的是怎样的控制方案,我便需要尝试着玩每一款受欢迎的休闲游戏,然后再玩一些不受欢迎的休闲游戏。在玩这些游戏的同时我将记下标准且受欢迎的游戏元素是什么,以及特别且不受欢迎的元素是什么。这些数据点将提供给我足够的信息用休闲玩家的角度去看待我的理念。当使用玩家同感时,我将尝试着问自己如下问题:

1.他们是否能够理解并玩游戏?

2.使用特别的游戏风格是否有趣?

在我问了这些基本的问题后,根据我所着眼于测试或者我尝试着去创造的游戏类型将会出现更具体的问题。如果我正在设计一款FPS/RPG,我将确保游戏中的RPG元素对于FPS玩家来说是有趣且有意义的,如此RPG玩家将能够享受到乐趣并理解FPS元素。你应该关注于游戏的目标玩家而不是那些将要玩你的游戏的玩家。如果你只是通过特定游戏风格,甚至是玩家类型而着眼于游戏,你便不可能清楚游戏中的元素会获得怎样的回应。你必须记得你想要瞄准怎样类型的玩家,这将最终明确游戏玩法所瞄准的目标市场。

game-tester(from ddmcdn)

game-tester(from ddmcdn)

当你发行一款游戏时,你总是很难明确有多少人在玩游戏以及你能够获得怎样的反馈。为了让更多人去玩你的游戏,你可能会希望创造出更加吸引人的游戏。然而,我会建议你不要这么做,因为你的大多数时间都将用于确保游戏中存在某些适合所有人的内容,而不是创造始终如一的高质量体验。如果你将创造一款普通且具有吸引力的游戏,你便需要确保游戏玩法对新玩家来说足够简单,同时还清楚硬核玩家希望它具有一定的挑战性。你需要确保游戏的主题对所有人来说都是有吸引力的,这意味着你需要进行许多研究并专注于测试你正在使用的特定主题。你花费在创造吸引大众的游戏的时间都是徒劳,因为当所有工作完成后,你仍然未拥有一款游戏,你所拥有的只是各种限制,更少的时间,或者你并不在乎的故事或美学理念,以及许多游戏测试。相反地,如果你一开始便瞄准一个特定的市场,或如果你通过MDA去明确特定的目标市场,你便能够利用那些玩家进行测试,并且继续享受自己所做的一切。明确一个目标市场将能让你专注于创造针对较小的用户群体的游戏。也许这样你不能获得许多玩家,但是你的目标玩家将能够获得一款高质量的游戏。瞄准目标市场的最有效的方法便是让游戏的开发和方向去指示你的前进方向。也许这看起来有点后退,但等到游戏成形再明确怎样的目标适合你将为你留出更多开发时间,并且让你能够创造出目标游戏,而不是不断改变它去适应特定的市场。如果游戏方向对你来说很重要的话,这点便非常有帮助。牢记着这点,不要等到项目即将发行时才选择市场。你应该尽早选择一个市场,因为这能让你针对特定问题去测试游戏,而不是尝试着调整每个游戏风格和对象。

一旦你拥有一个可行的原型,你和其他团队成员便需要开始进行测试。在测试过程中,你需要确保你或者其他人能够记录下所有可行与不可行的内容。你所收集的数据范围应该包括他们在哪个关卡死掉或输掉任务以及最常使用哪个机制。所有的这些数据都将帮助你在制作时间轴内做出决定并在之后做出航向的修改。举个例子来说吧,假设你的游戏拥有各种武器,并且你正在尝试着找到怎样的武器是可行的怎样的又是不可行的。测试将帮助你明确其中的一个武器Light Pistol的使用率不足1%。不足1%就意味着你需要为此做出重要的改变。可能直接拿掉武器而缩短图像部门花费在纹理,模型和优化上的时间会更好。然而,如果Light Pisto对于故事或游戏非常重要的话,你可能会希望它变得更加强大。确保你能够组织数据也很重要。使用像Excel或Google Analytics等软件将能够帮助你有效地组织收集到的所有数据。如果不能组织数据,人们将不能理解它或找到具有吸引力的特定的数据点。通过在团队中进行测试,你需要让那些从未听过或玩过游戏的人来游戏。确保你不能为测试者提供任何帮助。当人们是在5000英里外的地方玩游戏的时候(不在你身边),并不确定该做什么时,你最好让这些测试者去犯些错误。当玩家犯错或不能在游戏中完成某些内容时,你便会知道自己需要修改什么。在完成游戏测试后,你需要回顾数据并尝试着解决出现的问题。如果问题并不明显的话,你可以尝试着基于不同的修改创造一些原型。然后测试这些原型去判断哪个修改最成功。确保为此准备一份问卷调查,让测试者在完成测试后回答问题。问卷调查之所以很重要是因为它让你能够判断自己的观察是否准确并且去收集一些你并未察觉到的数据。你需要测试许多内容以此确保你的游戏是可行且具有娱乐性,但对于游戏成功来说最重要的还是游戏流和沉浸感。

游戏流是确保游戏拥有足够的挑战能够满足玩家技能的理念。如果游戏拥有太多挑战,玩家将会受挫。而拥有太少的挑战的话,游戏便会很无趣,沉浸感是让玩家不断相信自己处于游戏所勾勒的世界中,并且会忘记自己是在玩游戏的理念。沉浸感被打破的最显著情况便是游戏崩溃或出现问题。打破沉浸感的另外一种情况便是过场动画图像和游戏引擎图像相矛盾,并且在过场动画期间控制玩家。基于游戏流,你既可以提高游戏的娱乐性,同时也能够提高玩家在游戏世界中的沉浸感。通过游戏流获得沉浸感的一种方法便是在玩家进入游戏流区域时。当游戏挑战与玩家技能相碰撞时,玩家便会进入游戏流区域。在游戏流区域中,他们将更深刻地沉浸于游戏中,甚至有时候会忘记时间。忘记时间是因为游戏太复杂了需要他们投入更多的注意力,而不是因为太困难而导致他们不断去回想自己其实是在玩游戏。如果你曾经在白天的某一时刻开始玩游戏,并突然发现已经晚上了,不知不觉过去了4个多小时,你便已经身处于游戏流区域中了。拥有突出的游戏流理念将能确保玩家的注意力始终停留在游戏中。然而,当你在设计一个能够提高沉浸感并确保游戏能让玩家进入游戏流区域的元素时,你的玩家将对游戏世界拥有更大的信任感。最终这种信任感将帮助你描述游戏世界并让玩家更容易受到你所设定的情感的影响。如果你想要学习更多有关游戏流的内容,我会建议你阅读Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi的《Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience》。如果你想要阅读更多有关游戏流如何应用于游戏设计中的内容,我会建议你阅读Jenova Chen的论文《Flow in Games》。一个名为动态难度调整的新技巧将基于玩家的技能通过改变游戏难度去帮助完善游戏流。

动态难度调整(DDA)是不断改变游戏难度的过程。存在许多系统能够处理DDA,其中的一个系统包含从玩家身上获得像失去生命,精确度,解决一个问题所花费的时间等等输入内容。在系统记录了这一数据后,它将改变游戏难度去匹配那些数据点。其中所伴随的问题(游戏邦注:由Jenova Chen在有关游戏流的论文中提出)在于系统并不清楚所收集到的数据是否代表玩家的真正技能。假设你正在玩一款游戏,你想知道自己是否能够到达某一特定的建筑或山的最高处。尽管创造这一系统将告诉你需要花很多时间才能完成一个目标,并且如果你正在躲避敌人,系统可能会认为你不知道如何对付它们。为了帮助你,系统可能会降低下一个关卡的难度,即让敌人变得更容易打败。尽管我喜欢DDA的理念,但它所带有的问题却阻碍着我在任何游戏中去执行它。你能从DDA,游戏流和玩家同感中所领悟到的是,建造更复杂的区域有时候能够帮助玩家获得更多游戏体验。这一技巧并不能帮助玩家努力完成前面几个关卡。它也不能帮助玩家轻松地完成大部分关卡并发现最后几个关卡特别无聊。你应该适当地使用这一技巧,基于测试和目标市场改变其快速倾斜的难度。在你自己的项目中使用一个动态难度系统将浪费大量的时间而导致你很难去调整它。希望能够出现某家愿意制作并升级DDA系统的公司,从而让游戏开发公司能够购买并在自己的游戏中使用该技巧。就像许多公司在制作游戏开发者愿意购买并用于自己游戏的物理或动画引擎一样,这些完成并升级的DDA系统也将让游戏开发者更加专注于游戏中而不是其中的技术元素。不管你是使用什么工具去设计并开发游戏,你都应该勇敢地尝试那些自己不熟悉的工具。

关于游戏设计和开发很棒的一点是,比起其它表达媒体,这是一个较新的方式,还有许多发展空间。而在发展过程中一直会出现各种新的设计和开发方法,请不要害怕尝试不同的设计方法,因为你永远都不知道什么才是适合自己的。你只要记住,决定玩家是否喜欢你的游戏是取决于你投入多少努力去制作游戏。理念是廉价的,不管玩家是否获得理念,他们都能玩游戏,并且因为你的玩家同感以及对于游戏设计和开发工具的有效使用,他们都能够从中获得娱乐。

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

Tools of a Game Designer: What I use and What is out There

By Slaton White

There are a variety of ways to go about designing a game. Luckily enough I’ve had enough projects to work on and enough freedom to try different ways to design them. Some ways have completely failed me and others have shown real promise. In this post I will discuss both the general design tools and methods that are out there as well as what works for me as a designer. My basic template for designing a game is:

1.Come up with the aesthetic(s)

2.Find what dynamics support the aesthetic(s)

3.Build mechanics that make the dynamics work

4.Use iterative design to test how close my idea of the game is to the actual game

5.Go through the entire game with player empathy in mind

6.See what target market works best for the game

7.Testing, testing, testing, and more testing

Before you start building your game you need to decide what the mechanics, dynamics, and aesthetics (MDA) are. It is generally suggested that you begin with your aesthetics first even though mechanics and dynamics are usually referred to first. I can confirm that moving from aesthetics to dynamics to mechanics works better in terms of overall game quality and consistency because I have tried both. When you think of aesthetics you might be thinking of how the game looks, but in this instance it actually refers to how the player feels when they play the game. Once you figure out what you want the player to feel when they play your game, you can figure out what actions they need to do to cause those feelings. The actions the player takes are called dynamics. For example, say I wanted the player to feel really sad or evil. To make the player feel sad or evil I might have a dynamic where they need to kill off one of their cute and loveable pets in order to do something. Remember that dynamics are pretty broad actions such as leveling up or attacking. After you’ve figured out your dynamics you can figure out the mechanics. The mechanics are the extremely detailed rules that dictate what exactly happens when an action happens. Where dynamics are broad actions, mechanics are what specifically happens when the player does those actions. To go back to the “killing a pet” example, the mechanics for killing your pet might be that every time you kill one of your pets the other pets level up. Once I figure out my MDA I will immediately, if I haven’t already, make a prototype to test whether or not my mechanics and dynamics actually cause me to feel the desired aesthetic.

Making a prototype, testing it, documenting what was successful and what caused problems, and then making a new prototype that tries to fix those problems is called iterative design. Much like the scientific method it involves:

1.Coming up with a prototype

2.Playing and testing that prototype

3.Recording data

4.Looking at the data to make sure it supports the overall MDA and making note of the problems that cause it not to be successful

5.Making a new prototype that attempts to fix those problems.

As a game designer, iterative design is my favorite method for solving problems and testing new ideas. At the end of the day, I can think all I want about what kind of an effect such-and-such a mechanic will have on the player, but you get a much better idea of what it will do once you actually implement and test it. While it might seem like it takes a lot of time away from the other elements of production, in the end it will help immensely. While you’re designing and prototyping the game you are actually making versions, or at the very least sections of the game, that can be used later in production. It allows your team to work together to make quick and to the point prototypes that will end up strengthening your team. This is especially helpful if the team or members of the team haven’t worked together yet. It will be much easier in the long run to have them make mistakes and learn how to work with one another on prototypes than on the polished version. Iterative design can be a very useful tool, but without having good player empathy, you will never be able to fully utilize it.

Player empathy is the ability to look and play your game through the eyes of a player and not someone who knows what you or anyone on your team knows about the game. It is the most important tool you can use as a game designer because what you think the player might do at any given point could be completely different from what they actually do. For this reason it’s very important to make sure you can see your puzzles and levels without the knowledge that comes with working on them. How you actually accomplish this is basically a form of roleplaying. For example, say I’m making a casual puzzle game and I’m currently trying to think of a control scheme and mechanic to use for it. At some point I think that a cool control scheme to use would be the typical one found in first person shooters. So W, A, S, D moves the characters and the mouse is used for looking in different directions as well as shooting in a specific direction. Now I ask myself, if I were the typical type of player that goes for casual puzzle games, would I be able to figure out this control scheme and would I be able to use it? If it wasn’t immediately obvious to me that the FPS control scheme was too complicated for that particular type of game and I wasn’t really sure what casual players were used to I would try to play every popular casual game and then the unpopular casual games.  While playing those games I would make note of what the norm and popular game elements are as well as what the unusual and unpopular game elements are. Those points of data would hopefully give me enough information to look at my idea through the eyes of a casual player. When using player empathy I try to ask myself these general questions first:

1.Will they be able to understand and play it?

2.Will it be fun to a particular type of play style?

After I answer the general questions, more specific questions come up based on what type of player I am looking to test or more likely what type of game I’m trying to make. If I’m designing a FPS/RPG I will make sure that the RPG elements in the game are fun and make sense to FPS players and that the RPG players will be able to have fun and understand the FPS elements. Depending on who your game is for you will most likely need to pay attention to more than one type of player that will play your game. If you just look at your game through one particular play style or worse, what kind of player you are, then you’re not getting a good sense for how the elements in your game will be received. It’s important to remember that what types of players you base your decisions on will ultimately dictate what target market the gameplay is targeted for.

When you release a game it can be very nerve wracking to see how many people play it and what kind of feedback you get. To get the biggest amount of people to play your game you might want to make your game as generally appealing as possible. However, I would advise against it, because most of your time will be used to make sure that there is something for everyone in your game rather than making a consistent and high quality experience. If you were to make a generally appealing game you would have to make sure the gameplay is easy enough for new players while keeping in mind that hardcore players will want it to be challenging. You would need to make sure that the theme of the game appeals to everyone, which means doing lots and lots of research and focus testing just on the particular theme that you’re using. All the time you spend on making the game appealing to the masses is wasted, because after all that work is done, you still don’t have a game. All you would have is a whole lot of constraints, a lot less time, a story or aesthetic that you might not even care about, and a hell of a lot of play testing to do. Now if you start instead with a specific target market in mind or if you let the MDA dictate what specific target market would find the game appealing then you’ll be able to test with those players in mind and you will hopefully enjoy what you’re doing a lot more. Having a specific target market will allow you to focus on making a game that is tailored to a narrow audience. You might not get as many players, but what players you do get will have a high quality game that is meant for them. The best way to get a target market is to let the game’s development and direction dictate what target market you’re going for. It might seem backwards, but waiting for the game to take shape to see what target market it suits gives you more time for development and allows you to make the game how it should be made, instead of changing it to suit a particular market. This is especially helpful if the direction the game is going is something important to you. You’re even likely to put more polish, time, sweat, blood, tears, and thought into it then if you were just worried about selling one million copies. With this in mind, don’t wait till the project is close to shipping to choose a target market. You should choose one fairly early because it lets you focus your testing on specific types of problems rather than trying to accommodate every type of play style and person out there.

You and other people on your team should begin testing it as soon as you have a working prototype. During the tests you need to make sure you or someone else is documenting everything that works and everything that doesn’t work. The data you should collect should range from where on the level they died or failed the mission to what mechanic is being used the most. All this data will help you in making decisions and course corrections later in the production timeline. For example, say you have a variety of weapons in your game and are trying to find what weapons are working and what aren’t. Testing finds that one of the weapons, Light Pistol, is being used less than 1%. Less than 1% would dictate that a drastic change needs to occur. It might be better to take the weapon out completely to reduce the amount of time your art department spends on texturing, modeling, and polishing it. However, if the Light Pistol was extremely important to the story or the game in some way, than you might want to make it more powerful. Making sure you organize the data is also important. Using software such as Excel or Google Analytics will help to make all the data you collect actually useable to the people that need. Without organizing the data, people will be unable to make any sense of it or find specific points of data that applies to them. Along with testing within the team you should get people that have never heard or played the game before to play it. Make sure that you don’t help public play testers with the game at all. You won’t be around when someone 5,000 miles away plays your game and isn’t sure what to do so it’s better to let play testers make mistakes. When players make mistakes or are unable to do something in game, it shows you what needs to be fixed. After play testing has finished, review the data and try to solve the problems that came up. If it isn’t immediately obvious what needs to be done to solve a problem, try making a few prototypes with different fixes. Then test those prototypes to see which fix is the most successful. Be sure have a questionnaire ready for them to answer after they finish play testing. Questionnaires are important because it allows you to see if your observations were correct and to gather data that you can’t observe, such as if they would play again. You’ll need to test for a lot of things to make sure your game is accessible and entertaining, but something paramount to a game’s success is flow and immersion.

Flow is the concept of making sure the game has enough challenge to meet the skills of the players that plays it. Have too much challenge and the game is frustrating and difficult. Have too little challenge and the game is boring and no fun to play. Immersion is the idea that a player will constantly believe that they are in the world that the game is portraying and will forget that they are playing a game. Obvious ways that immersion is broken include when the game crashes or has glitches. More subtle ways of breaking it include having inconsistent art styles between the cut scene graphics and the game engine graphics, as well as taking control from the player during a cut scene. With flow you can help both how entertained they are and how immersed they are in the game world. One way immersion is gained with flow is when the player enters the flow zone. The player is in the flow zone when the challenge of the game meets the skill of the player. In the flow zone they are more immersed in the game and will sometimes lose track of time. This loss of time is due to the game being difficult enough to require they pay attention, but not so difficult that they are constantly reminded that they are playing a game. If you’ve ever started playing a game at some point during the day and looked up to notice it’s now nighttime and somehow 4 hours have passed then you have been in the flow zone. The idea of having good flow could be summarized in making sure the attention of the player stays on the game. However, when you design elements that improve immersion and make sure the game allows the player to enter into the flow zone, than the player will have more believability and trust in the game world. Ultimately this trust and believability will help in portraying the story of the game and will cause the player to be more susceptible to the emotions you set out to cause. If you’d like to learn more about flow then I recommend reading Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. If you’d like to read more about how flow applies to game design then I recommend reading Jenova Chen’s thesis, Flow in Games.  A new technique, that is slowly gaining steam, called dynamic difficulty adjustment helps with flow by changing how difficult the game is based on the skill of the player.

Dynamic difficulty adjustment (DDA) is the process of changing how difficult the game is on the fly. There are numerous systems around that deal with DDA and one such system involves taking input from the player such as health lost, accuracy, time it takes to solve a puzzle as well as many others. After the system records this data it then changes the later difficulties in the game to meet those data points. The problems with it, pointed out by Jenova Chen in this thesis on flow, is that the system doesn’t know if the data it is collecting is representative of the actual skill of the player. Say you’re playing a game and you decide that you want to get to the top of a specific building or mountain just to see if you can. While doing this the system would see that it’s taking a lot of time for you to finish an objective and if you’re avoiding enemies it might think that you don’t know how to deal with them. Trying to help you, the system might change the next level to be easier to navigate and populate it with enemies that are easier to beat. While I love the idea of DDA, the obvious problems with it keep me from trying to implement it in any games I make. What you can take from DDA, flow, and player empathy is that building up to more difficult areas can sometimes help players become more and more experienced with the game. This technique doesn’t help players that struggle to get through the first few levels. It also doesn’t help players that breeze through a majority of the levels and find the last few levels extremely boring. Use that technique sparingly and change how quickly it ramps up in difficulty based on testing and your target market. Using a dynamic difficulty system by itself in your own project will most likely be too time consuming with how much you will need to tweak it. Hopefully companies will crop up whose purpose it is to produce and update a DDA system that a game development company can then buy and use within their game. Much like companies that produce physics or animation engines that game developers buy for their games, these completed and updated DDA systems would allow the game developer to work more on the game and less on the technical aspects of it. Whatever tools you use to design and develop your game, don’t be afraid to try ones that you aren’t familiar with.

The great thing about game design and development is that since it is fairly new, compared to other mediums of expression, it has a lot of room to grow. Due to this growth, new ways to design and develop crop up all the time so don’t be afraid to try different methods of design, because you never know what might work for you. Just keep in mind that what decides if your game is liked or not is how much effort you put into the production of the game. Ideas are cheap, whether or not the player gets the concept, is able to play it, and is entertained by it is due to your player empathy and how well you use game design and development tools.(source:slatonwhite)


上一篇:

下一篇: