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

万字长文,Lucas Blair谈游戏成就系统的设定和价值性

发布时间:2014-10-11 09:54:44 Tags:,,

游戏邦注:本文原作者是调查研究博士兼游戏设计师卢卡斯·布莱尔(Lucas Blair),他做了个学术研究,制定出了几个设计游戏成就系统的优化方案,全文总共三个章节。

在游戏领域,成就系统是一个热点话题。 玩家对成就系统的反应从痴迷到冷漠各不相同, 而设计者在成就系统的运用观点上也颇有分歧。 无论是否有争议,成就系统的问题就摆在眼前了,所以游戏设计者必须学习如何把成就系统的潜力发挥到极致。为了让成就系统在游戏中发挥积极作用,就必须在游戏设计过程中深谋远虑,而不是事后再补缺补漏。

angry birds(from gamerboom.com)

angry birds(from gamerboom.com)

在许多情况下,成就系统总是在游戏接近完工时才被随随便便地夹塞到游戏中。一个精心制作的游戏机制却带着个这个粗制滥造的成就系统,悲剧就是这么发生的。

如果设计成就系统能像设计游戏的其他环节一样扎实认真,它也可以提升玩家的游戏体验和游戏的综合素质。

成就系统的设计指导,应当是涵盖广泛的论题、确定的科学研究。卢卡斯·布莱尔在本文通过解析如何在游戏中设置成就系统,与各位开发者分享游戏成就设计特点的分类标准。

标准分类的目的是从设计中总结出成就系统的作用机制。研究表明,成就系统会影响玩家的行动表现、积极性和态度。

虽然作者打算把这个分类标准说得广泛全面一些,但他认为这个观点以后很可能遭到争议并且面临修正。不过就目前来看,如果设计师打算有效地利用成就系统的潜力,暂且可以 认为这是一个不错的讨论起点。

他的观点涉及以下概念:

评价成就

完成成就

乏味任务和趣味任务

成就难度

目标取向

评估成就VS. 完成成就

分类标准的第一部分是对比评估成就和完成成就,此二者描述的是两个不同的情况,根据这两个情况来奖励玩家的行动。

评估成就是给那些完成某个级别任务的玩家提供奖励。可以通过对照其他玩家的表现、他们自己的表现或是游戏设计者设定的标准来评价玩家表现。

我们以《愤怒的小鸟》中的星级为例。在这款游戏中,玩家是凭借自己的游戏表现获得星星。评估成就好比是一种反馈机制,因为它实际上是对玩家表现的一种评价。有关训练和 教育反馈的研究资料表明,因为反馈能反映玩家在自我设定目标中的表现,所以这种反馈对玩家来说大有裨益。

这种反馈增加了玩家的胜任意识,随之激发了玩家的内在动机(游戏邦注:intrinsic motivation——个体发展的一种内在的愿望,渴望去做某件事情,并且很自然地认为做某件 事是有益的)。增加胜任意识可以平衡某些消极影响,例如因滥用奖励而减少了玩家的内在动机。

另一方面,胜任意识并没有告诉玩家他们在任务中的表现如何,而只是在玩家完成任务后就给予奖励。胜任意识可以分为两个子类:偶然成就和必然成就(performance contingent achievements 和non-performance contingent achievements)。偶然成就是个技术活,而必然成就可在游戏过程中自动获得。

在《魔兽世界》中,玩家首次完成地下城的任务才能获得相应成就,偶然成就的获得与此类似。回顾下我们刚才提到的一个说法——用获得奖励来刺激玩家的内在动机,这样可以 更好地理解这个偶然成就的概念。有一些激励设置在玩家的任务表现里发挥了重要的积极作用。然而,这种类型的奖励可能减少玩家的自主性,特别是被滥用时,内在动机也随之 减少。

奖励也为玩家在奖励临界值时的表现制造了一个人为上限。一旦玩家获得了这个成就奖励,他们的就不太可能继续这种任务。对游戏开发者而言,这种情况就体现为游戏的重玩价 值。奖励使得玩家趋向保守,因为他们不想失去奖励的机会。特别是在电子游戏里,游戏设计者鼓励玩家带着创新精神和实验精神玩游戏。

必然成就的获得,就像参与某个游戏事件然后获得一枚徽章或者一只宠物。这对玩家的内在动机就没有什么负面影响。然而,因为这种类型的奖励实在缺乏评估标准,所以玩家不 太可能乐衷于这些奖励,除非这与加强游戏社交联系有关。

优化方案:替换完成成就,用评估成就的反馈作用来刺激玩家的内在动机。

乏味任务VS.趣味任务

完成成就要靠完成一个任务或一系列任务。从玩家的角度看,这是一个经历一系列无聊和刺激的游戏过程。乏味任务获得的成就和趣昧任务获得的成就是不同的。

乏味任务(例如MMO游戏中的贸易技能)可以与外在动机配对,这种任务的成就设置是为了玩家能参与其中。因为玩家不想接手这种任务,奖励也无法刺激玩家的内在动机。

激发玩家参与乏味任务的常规策略有两种。第一种是通过成就的描述,让玩家意识到这种任务的内在价值。

以《致命捕捞:混乱海域》中的“救生员成就”为例,救出船员的人将获此成就。救生员这个词暗示了该任务的重要性,因为这意味着玩家是在救援他人。

第二个是增加任务本身的额外规则或设想。这个方法在所有成就的大部分基础级别中均有应用。

趣味任务不需要其他形式的动机、奖励或者欺骗性描述,玩家也乐意参与其中。所以这种成就(特别是完成成就)应该有节制地使用。

这种成就应该谨慎使用而非以此来增加游戏的人为乐趣,因为这样才能使玩家集中关注重要的任务技巧或策略。此外,通过任务策略提示,可以改善玩家的表现。

《星际争霸2》中的“The Flying Heal Bus”成就是个范例,这个成就帮助玩家更有效地使用某种特殊装置。

优化方案:奖励乏味任务,反馈有趣任务,达成有趣的任务成就。

成就难度

游戏设计者提出了两种成就难度。第一,成就的实际难度应该是玩家能达到但仍存在一定挑战性。第二,玩家在特定任务里应该有足够的自我效能(游戏邦注:self-efficacy是许 多人对于自身能否完成特定任务的能力的认知,它可以将影响行动结果的因素转化为先行因素,对于行动发生效用)使之有信心尝试任务。

成就应该为玩家提供有挑战性的目标,成就难度如果适宜,玩家会在任务中表现中获得在更好的收益和更大的成就感。然而,如果达成成就的难度太大,玩家甚至不会去尝试;但 三两下就搞定的低级成就,显然太没有挑战性。保持游戏任务趣味性的一般策略是,为操作熟练的玩家提供可选择的的任务目标。

玩家的自我效能是设计者需要考虑的另一个重要因素。因为自我效能与增加目标承诺、策略创新和使用以及增加对消极反馈的乐观反应有关,所以增强玩家的自我效能非常重要。

设计者可以通过满足四个因素来影响玩家的自我效能。第一个是相关学科的专业知识水平。游戏之所以能保证所有技术级别的玩家都有成就可以达成,这个因素是重要原因。

目睹周围人的成功,或者叫替代性经验(游戏邦注:vicarious experience,个体首先通过社会比较过程判断他人能力的高低,而后通过信息提供过程观察,并从他人的成功操作 中获取有效的解决问题的策略),是第二个影响自我效能的因素。如果本身与成功者具有相当的能力,这种影响就会非常巨大。在线游戏的排行榜或者像OnLive系统中的“brags”
就反映了这种影响作用。

社会劝导(给别人口头刺激)是第三个影响自我效能的因素。这种因素的作用形式非常简单,就像有人完成一个任务,听到“好样的!”或者《吉他英雄》中出现 “50 NOTE STREAK!”的信息。个人自我感觉是第四个因素。这个因素影响玩家的压力指数、情绪状态和生理状况。

优化方案:在玩家的表现和享受过程中,给予挑战性成就最大奖励。描述成就和设计交互作用增加玩家的自我效能。

目标取向

因为玩家的目标取向会影响玩家如何通过确定个人目标来体验游戏,所以在设计成就系统时,开发者就必须考虑到玩家的目标取向。有两种类型的目标取向,一般被称为成绩定向 和掌握定向。喜欢成绩定向的玩家关注他人对自己表现的评价。而掌握定向型的玩家看重的是提升自己的熟练程度。

因为游戏中不断强调时间和分数这类直接目标,使得玩家往往倾向于成绩定向。可惜,倾向于这种类型的玩家很少冒险,也很少花时间来探索游戏,因为他们害怕这样会影响游戏 得分。

这种情况在第一人称射击游戏中司空见惯。在这类游戏中,玩家反复使用同一种武器和策略,因为他们认为这就是最大化杀伤数的不二法宝。但研究表明,成绩定向型的玩家,往 往只在非常简单的任务中表现得比较好。

为了平衡玩家的这种倾向,设计者必须积极设法在他们定下的目标和反馈中灌输掌握定向的思想。培养掌握定向的倾向有这么几个闪光点:

有这种倾向的玩家乐于接受错误并且敢于接受提高自身能力的挑战性任务;这类倾向的任务中玩家会有更高的自我效能,并且能利用更多有效的策略;研究还表明,掌握倾向型的 玩家,能在复杂的任务里表现得更出色。

为了培养掌握定向的倾向,设计者应该创造也这么种成就——承认玩家做出的努力并且在挑战中支持这种努力。游戏应该把玩家做出的错误和失误当作对游戏的诊断性反馈和改进 的鼓励。

为了有效地传达这种类型,成就的名称和描述非常重要。以《Heavy Rain》为例,“如此接近”战利品,这话是针对那些做出尝试但失败了的玩家。这句话可以看作是鼓励和认同 玩家所做出的努力。

相反地,在《吉他英雄III》一个类似的成就,名为“Blowing It”,这个名称可能就让人觉得有些丧气。

优化方案:在鼓励创新和策略的困难任务中灌输掌握定向的思想。在简单和重复的任务中灌输成绩定向的思想。对于仍在学习怎么玩游戏的新玩家,应设法在掌握定向阶段留住他 们。

现在,我重述一下第一部分内容的扼要。成就系统的设计指导,应当是涵盖广泛的论题的、确定的科学研究。在本文,我会通过解析如何在游戏中设置成就系统,来共享当前游戏 成就设计特点的分类标准。

标准分类的目的是从设计中总结出成就系统的作用机制。研究表明,成就系统会影响玩家的行动表现、积极性和态度。

虽然我打算把这个分类标准说得广泛全面一些,但很可能遭到争议,还面临着以后的修正。如果我们打算有效地利用成就系统的潜力,暂且认为这是一个不错的讨论起点。

本部分将涉及以下概念:

预期成就vs.意外成就

成就通告

成就持久性

成就可见性

预期成就vs.意外成就

当玩家取得一项成就,收到的成就通告的那一刻,玩家就像得到了突如其来的惊喜,或者奋力拼搏终于撞破了终点线。这种期望有赖于游戏成就系统的设计决定——可以让玩家事 先知道能获得什么成就,也可以让成就出乎意料地出现在游戏中。这就是预期成就和意外成就的不同,但二者都能用于提升玩家的游戏体验。

预期成就让玩家在之前就为自己立下目标。这样做有四个确凿的好处:

第一,玩家有了具体目标就可以更好地分配自己的资源。也就是说,玩家为了达到目标,就要重新温习自己的某种技术、节省额外时间或者向朋友求助。

第二,为了目标的达成,玩家更乐意发奋努力。对游戏开发者而言,玩家的这种努力意味着他们体验游戏的时间也在延长。

例如,玩家要花许多个小时来达成《魔兽争霸》中的“Salty”成就(游戏邦注:玩家必须取得所有钓鱼成就)——我可以亲自证明这可能是个无休无止的过程。

第三,带着目标的玩家在陷入困境时也能迎难而上,而那些漫无目的的玩家更可能在困难面前轻言放弃。

第四,为了达到目标,玩家更可能致力于掌握新知识和新技术。这一点对游戏开发者同样意义重大——掌握了新技术的玩家更可能成为回头客。

除了以上好处,预期成就使玩家在体验游戏前就形成一种游戏的心理模式,或叫心智模型(游戏邦注:简单地说,心智模型就是人们接受外界信息后在脑中形成一个思维的模型号 来描述或者刻画外部世界,从而对人们的认知和行为起某种指导作用)。根据这种心理模式,有利于玩家搞清游戏的运作机制和决定应对的措施。如果玩家买了一款新游戏后,查
看了所有自己可以获得的成就,他们对游戏本身就会有更清晰的理解,也就是玩家形成了心理模式。事实上,心理模式的形成也经常运用于提升用户表现的训练项目。

相对而言,意外成就在电子游戏中的运用并不普遍,但对玩家同样有潜在价值。这种像挣外快一样的成就可能有助于鼓励玩家尝试性地体验游戏玩法。

在《成就解锁》中可以找到这个外快策略的典型。玩家在该游戏中几乎做什么都可能获得稀奇古怪的成就。尽管开发者料想该游戏可能戳破游戏成就系统滥用的基线,但《成就解 锁》还是有效地阐明了这款metagame使玩家抱着获得所有神秘成就的目的,任意在屏幕四处上蹿下跳。

最优方案:在游戏中,预期成就占主导,这样玩家可以为自己确立目标,形成游戏心理模式。但要保证成就描述能准确地反映其对玩家的行动要求和该成就的重要性。少量的意外 成就能鼓励玩家的创意玩法,建议开发者适当运用这种策略。

League of Legends(from mmohuts.com)

League of Legends(from mmohuts.com)

成就通告

成就达成后,玩家必须知道自己完成了什么。游戏开发者可以选择在游戏过程中直接告之玩家,也可以选择过一段时间(游戏的自然中断)后才公布成就达成情况。采用即时通告 或者延迟通告,要根据游戏类型和玩家的经验水平来决定。

游戏过程中出现的成就通告就是一种即时通告,如《魔兽世界》中的成就通告。研究表明,即时通告可以促进玩家对游戏的了解和提高玩家完成任务的效率。当玩家的目标成就与 玩家在游戏中的表现有关时,这一点显得尤其重要。

然而,对于游戏老手,从即时反馈中得到的益处并没有像菜鸟玩家那样多。随着玩家经验的增长,更多地使用延迟通告反而更实在,因为这样老玩家才有机会自我评估表现。

即时通告有一个潜在的干扰作用,这是需要慎重考虑的。这种干扰打断游戏状态(玩家通常称游戏的流畅状态为“the zone”),进而对玩家产生不良影响。

当玩家陶醉于游戏时,玩家的注意力完全集中在游戏里,游戏之外的时空早已置之度外——这种体验对于玩游戏,特别是玩自己最喜欢的游戏的人来说,应该不陌生。

在游戏世界中流连忘返的玩家,会更有动力继续玩下去、体验更多乐趣。所以那种扑面而来的成就通告就直接干扰了玩家的状态,可能并不讨喜。

为了避免分散玩家的注意力,那种费心思的游戏(例如即时战略游戏)最好使用延迟通告。对于《星际争霸》这类环节界定清晰的游戏,在游戏自然中断后给予玩家成就通告则更 合适。

这种类型的通告有着类似延迟反馈的益处——增强对新知识的记忆。所以,在新游戏中首次一展身手的玩家,如果记住了第一次的技巧,更有可能在以后的游戏环节中温习技巧。

最优方案:在过程中缺乏自然中断的游戏中采用弹出式即时通告,且通告上顺带更详细的成就解释。而对那些环节界定明确的游戏和需要高度集中精神的游戏来说,延迟通告比即 时通告更可取。给新玩家即时反馈,给游戏老手延迟反馈。

成就持久性

玩家取得某项成就,过了很久以后,可能会打算重温历史。永久性成就允许玩家回顾辉煌的往昔,而临时性成就对玩家而言犹如过眼云烟,转瞬即逝。

永久性成就分为两类:有形奖励和储存清单。前者指的是达成某项成就后获得的奖品,后者指的是成就描述的目录表。有形奖励是个抽象概念,因为这种奖励只存在于虚拟世界。 但是,像宠物或装备这类有形奖励可以为玩家所用,还能像实际物质奖励一样获得其他人的羡慕。

注意:如果运用于现实世界的奖励法则也被运用于虚拟世界,那就要当心滥用有形奖励的问题。有形奖励会减少玩家的内在动机(游戏邦注:intrinsic motivation—–个体发展 的一种内在的愿望,渴望去做某件事情,并且很自然地认为做某件事是有益的),降低玩家自我决定的意识,还会减少玩家重返任务的可能性。

有了成就的储存清单(例如Xbox Live中的功能),玩家可以随时回顾自己获得成就后的表现,从而温故知新。

临时性成就,就像第一人称射击游戏中的“Unstoppable”或“God-Like”,相当于口头褒扬。不像有形成就,这些口头赞扬增加了玩家的内在动机,也不会破坏玩家的自决意识。 临时成就会随着通告的消失而消失。

最优方案:采用某些储存清单来满足玩家想回顾游戏史的愿望。有形奖励对玩家有极大的激励作用,但玩家获得这种成就后,它就不再有吸引力了。

成就可见性

在单人游戏和多人游戏中,玩家的成就栏通常是对其他玩家开放的,不同游戏成就栏的开放信息也不尽相同。一些游戏将决定权交付玩家的手中。这些托管式的设定使成就变成了 昭然若揭的事。玩家自定义的成就设置,如在《FarmVille》和《星际争霸2》,使玩家可自行决定公开哪些内容。

社会认可是玩家玩游戏的一大诱因。把成就公之于众,可以鼓励玩家为了认同感而努力获得成就。研究表明,社会认同感可作为内在动机,从而对玩家表现产生积极影响。

同级的玩家通过查看他人的成就,可以定位自己的成就目标。成就的奋斗过程和最终达成能促进玩家的自我效能(游戏邦注:self-efficacy,是许多人对于自身能否完成特定任务 的能力的认知,它可以将影响行动结果的因素转化为先行因素,对于行动发生效用),从而有助于完成其他游戏任务。

成就的可见性就像一种游戏简历。一个玩家能当共同奋斗的队友还是不耻下问的老师,看看他的成就获得情况就心知肚明了。

然而,这种对外公开的成就,也潜藏着缺陷。如上所述,简历般的成就可能把一些玩家排挤出其他玩家群体。

在MMO游戏中,这种现象司空见惯。在这类游戏中,其他玩家在允许入组前通常会被查看其成就情况。这就造成一种两难困境——玩家要获得经验,同时本身又必须有经验。过分依 赖作为动机的社会认同感还产生了另一个问题:一旦这种认同感减少或得不到,玩家仿佛失去了预报器,以后的游戏表现就堪忧了。

最优方案:成就对其他有强烈动机的玩家可见。为了防止菜鸟玩家受排斥,肯庇护他们的其他玩家将获得某种成就。让玩家展示一些引起为傲的成就,从而增加他们的游戏积极性 ,同时突出其游戏操作风格。

成就系统的设计指导,应当是涵盖广泛的论题的、确定的科学研究。在本文,我会通过解析如何在游戏中设置成就系统,来共享当前游戏成就设计特点的分类标准。标准分类的目 的是从设计中总结出成就系统的作用机制。研究表明,成就系统会影响玩家的行动表现、积极性和态度。虽然我打算把这个分类标准说得综合全面一些,但很可能遭到争议,还面 临着以后的修正。如果我们打算有效地利用成就系统的潜力,暂且认为这是一个不错的讨论起点。

在本文的第三部分,将涉及以下概念:

·消极成就

·金钱成就

·挑战成就和超级成就

·竞技成就

·合作成就

消极成就(“囧”成就、“ORZ”成就)

通常情况下,达成某项成就是件无比光荣的事——意味着在某任务、等级或财富等方面达到了显著甚至是显赫的程度。但玩家也会有被喝倒彩的时候,所以就有了一些不是那么光 彩的成就——某方面表现差到一“系统认可”的程度的玩家得到这类成就。不少游戏中存在这类成就系统,如在游戏《命令与征服3》中,如果玩家在排名游戏中跌出官方排名20位 ,就会被“授予”某个消极成就;在PS3游戏《战神》中,反复死亡的玩家将收获“我被打得落花流水”(Getting My Ass Kicked)的“荣誉”。

在游戏中表现不佳本来就不是件幸事,更何况还得到了个消极成就,无异于在伤口上撒把盐。玩家可能会因此丧失自信心和独立性,从而降低对游戏的满足感。如果玩家事先知道 游戏中存在消极成就,可能会想方设法避开。但这样的回避毕竟不是长久之计,久而久之,玩家也会整个游戏心生厌烦。

如果游戏设计本身存在缺陷,那么消极成就可能会对游戏造成二次打击。有些玩家在游戏中反复地死亡,如果是因为不合理的等级设计或者崩溃的游戏机制,就不该得到“你太逊 了“这样的成就。否则,玩家只会归咎于游戏而不是玩家自己。

最佳方案:不使用消极成就。为那些表现比较“挣扎”的玩家提供点反馈性的帮助。

金钱成就

金钱成就即获得的成就可以当成虚拟金钱在游戏中通行。这种金钱可以表现为点数、金币或星级等,玩家可以用来购买游戏中的虚拟商品或者现实中的商品。微交易导向型游戏, 如《League of Legends》,它的成就奖励还表现为在游戏中可获得的其他形式的金钱。

当成就以虚拟金钱的形式表现出来,显然是个不错的衡量标准。玩家能达到成就的要求已经是非常荣耀的事了,再加上虚拟金钱的成就奖励,那真是个令人难忘的经历啊。然而, 以虚拟金钱作为成就奖励的方式,也可能对玩家产生广泛影响。

大量研究表明,将虚拟金钱作为成就奖励来刺激玩家的表现,比用无形奖励的效果更好。这可能是因为玩家可以使用金钱成就购买自己想要的商品,而不是得到设计师设计的系统 “钦点”的奖励。

近年以来,有些学校也开始以金钱作用奖励,如奖励课堂出勤、考试成绩,金钱奖励甚至提高了大学入学率。但只有以投入作为奖励标准而不是产出时,成效才会增加。也就是说 ,学生得到奖励的前提应该是他在学习上投入了足够多的时间,而不是看他得到了多少分数。这个例子映射到游戏上就是,以金钱作为成就奖励应该参照的标准是玩家在游戏中投
入的时间、精力,而不是其最终的等级。

金钱奖励通常会与游戏中的无形奖励产生对立。因为它会降低成就获得者的内在动机,即最终玩家关注的只是奖励系统,而不是游戏本身。不少游戏公司都利用这种奖励系统把玩 家拴在一些无聊的任务上。此外,金钱奖励无声无息地煽动玩家去寻找获得金钱成就的路径,其代价可能是降低了玩家在游戏中的创造力。

最佳方案:把金钱作为玩家完成任务的奖励,而不是让其产生强大的控制欲的成就奖励。金钱奖励可以用于提高游戏的吸引力,但不要使之成为玩家参与某游戏活动的主导。

挑战成就和超级成就

大多的时间相关成就是通过完成单个任务而获得。但这里所说的挑战成就和系列成就的达成要求可不是只完成一个任务。

挑战成就的获得条件是,玩家完成一连串小任务单元——这些单元任务本身是附属于同一个完整的大任务,只是各个小任务难度递增。什么是挑战任务?杀掉25万5百怪物或者1千 个敌人(FPS)、收集不同颜色的丝带(《FarmVille》)就叫挑战任务。

超级成就的达成要求是玩家完成不同任务中的一系列成就。如在《魔兽世界》中,玩家要达成“大厨”的成就就必须首先完成所有与烹饪相关的成就。

挑战成就和超级成就都可以作为“循序渐进学游戏”的教学训练。一个看似相当复杂的任务,只有被分解成数个按顺序排列的小任务单元,才能像训练计划那样指导玩家最终完成 整个任务。

这种“肢解”式的任务会给玩家带来间接好处——玩家搞清楚复杂任务的结构后,更有可能参与任务。

要达成挑战成就和超级成就,通常要花上那么一阵子的时间,这与长期任务相似。长期任务的好处之一是,奖励玩家的每一个任务步骤,所以累积收益远大于短期任务;另一个好 处是玩家会为了完成任务而投入更多时间(对游戏设计者而言,玩家将更多时间投入到游戏中当然是件好事)。

这类成就也有潜在缺陷。做一连串相同的任务或动作,犹如跟着撒在路上的面包屑找回家的路,玩家会觉得没有自我方向,从而丧失主动性。所以,成就的数量、其间隔和其挑战 难度的设定就是件值得商榷的事了。

最佳方案:利用这类成就保持玩家的长期兴趣,并以相关活动做指引。无论是在时间还是空间上,各个小任务的间隔要有度,不要让玩家有受制感。

竞技成就

竞技成就的达成前提是一个玩家与另一个玩家的直接对抗(PK)或间接对抗(单一任务得分)。这类成就可以是个人达成(单挑),也可以是团队达成(群殴)。

研究表明,竞技可以增加特定任务的乐趣,从而端正玩家的态度。成功的竞技结果会增加玩家的自我能力认同感,从而刺激玩家的内在动机。此外,处于竞争性环境的玩家在重复 性任务中的表现通常会有所提升。

不仅是游戏,竞技元素在现实生活中的运用也常有良好的效果——在计算机课中增加竞技环节,可以活跃课堂气氛。

尽管竞争性环境有其合理性,甚至优越性存在,但研究同样表明,在某些情况下,竞技性玩法应该有所回避。

玩家的学习过程时常受到竞争性环境的阻碍。究其原因,一部分是因为在竞争环境下,玩家的自我中心主义往往会被激发出来,这种自私的情绪极可能抑制玩家乐于助人的一面。 另外,竞争过激还会对玩家的自我效能(自信心)产生消极影响。在这种负面影响的驱使下,玩家往往对自己和队友的要求更加苛刻,特别是当队伍输掉某个任务或战斗时。

还有一点要考虑到到的是玩家个人的动机问题。那些技术水平上乘的老玩家相对而言更能享受到竞技成就带来的快乐,更少受到其负面影响。所以他们会流连于他们所熟悉的竞技 环境中,且不会因为额外竞争而感到压力。这些达成成就动机高的玩家比动机低的玩家更享受挑战竞争性任务。当然,通常情况下玩家达成成就的积极性也受到游戏类型的影响。 所以,把好玩家人数统计关、定位其游戏兴趣取向,也是游戏成就系统设计中非常重要的课题。

最佳方案:如果要在游戏中设置竞技成就,务必保证玩家对游戏的上手程度。

合作成就(非竞技成就)

合作成就,顾名思义,就是玩家要在游戏中通力配合完成一个共同目标。这种类型的成就在多人游戏中最为普遍,因为在多人游戏中,玩家产生互动的时候更多。合作的情况一般 是这样的:

玩家组队接受团队任务,如杀死一只大怪;或者玩家要杀满1000个敌人,显然玩家单打独斗非常难完成——第一人称射击游戏就是利用这种任务鼓励玩家组队。

大多情况下,合作性环境有利于提升玩家的表现。当评价一个同伴时,合作性环境就已经与更伟大的成就、更强烈的自尊和更高的积极性挂钩了。因此,需要合作的任务相对于一 个人就能解决的任务,更能促进玩家的表现。

合作的另一个优点是,面对不能独立完成的任务时,玩家仍然有更广泛的目标范围。为了体现这个优点,还要鼓励资深玩家与菜鸟玩家合作,然后给予资深玩家相应的成就。

在《City of Heroes》中有一个同伴系统。研究发现,那些在生意上受关照的玩家比起“姥姥不疼,舅舅不爱”的玩家,升级更快、对工作更满意。在游戏中充当“导师、保护人 ”的玩家本身也从这种系统中受益,因为他们可以看到自己的表现和社会地位的提高。

虽然合作性设置有诸多好处,但也不是全然没有风险的。风险之一是,团队成员的态度极端化,导致整体的决定过于拘谨或过于冒险。在这种情况下,就算有机会做出成员自己的 决定,得出的也只是下下策。

另一个风险是,如果成员交流和互助的额外工作阻碍了团队表现,那么游戏过程缺失的情况就会发生。所谓“额外工作”是指因为技术有限产生的交流困难,导致的游戏过程缺失 的情况更加突出。在MMO的突袭行动中,如果玩家没有语音聊天软件,那么玩家就不得不花更多时间在交流沟通上(打字肯定比说话慢嘛)。

团队合作引起的风险还有“南郭现象”。当一个团队规模比较大时,个人的表现往往会被掩盖,这时,滥竽充数、混水摸鱼的人就很难被发现。

最佳方案:为了促进合作环境的和谐,可以考虑给予帮助低级玩家的高级玩家某些成就。给予团队的合作成就要保持相对小,以缓合游戏过程缺失现象及减少“南郭先生”。在团 队合作的任务中,决定成就达成的标准也应被运用于评价玩家个人的表现。

结语

成就系统的设计是一个相当复杂的课题,但非常有研究价值。希望我这篇概要能带给游戏开发者、爱好者们一点启发。这类课题的研究难点在于,总是要借鉴其他领域的研究成果
,然后将其调整为符合游戏开发需要的结论。

为了弥补这些论题的不足,RETRO研究室目前正在分门别类地研究成就系统的设计。我们的研究方式是将不同游戏中各种类型的成就加以置换,然后评估各个成就系统对玩家造成的 影响,即考察游戏乐趣和游戏时间等。

如果我们的研究室有新的研究成果出炉,我们将对游戏社区全面公布重要成果。感谢过去几周对我的研究发表评论的意见的朋友们。我希望关于成就系统设计的辩论还能继续下去 ,也希望我的文章能激发大家的讨论灵感。相关拓展:篇目1.篇目2篇目3(本文由游戏邦编译,转载请注明来源,或咨询微信zhengjintiao)

The Cake Is Not a Lie: How to Design Effective Achievements

[In this first in a new series of articles, PhD researcher and game designer Lucas Blair uses academic research to formulate best practices for designing in-game achievements.]

Achievements are a hot topic in the gaming industry. Player feelings toward them range from obsession to indifference and designers seem equally torn over their use. Controversial or not, achievements appear to be here to stay, so designers need to learn to utilize them to their fullest potential. Achievements, if they are intended to have a positive effect on players, must be a forethought, and not an afterthought, during the game design process.

In many cases they are carelessly tacked on to a game after it is already close to completion. Unfortunately, the benefits of a carefully-crafted game mechanic can be undermined by attaching a poorly-designed achievement to it.

Alternatively, if achievements are designed in the same manner as other aspects of games, they can be used to improve the player’s experience and the overall quality of a game.

There is an established body of scientific study covering a wide range of topics, which should guide the design of achievements. In this article series, I will be sharing a taxonomy of achievement design features created by deconstructing how achievements are currently used in games.

The goal of this exercise is to distill mechanisms of action out of achievement designs, which have been shown by research to affect performance, motivation, and attitudes.

This taxonomy, although intended to be comprehensive, is likely to be subject to debate and future revisions. For the time being however, I think it is a good jumping off point for a discussion that must be had if we are to ever effectively harness the potential of achievements.

In part one I will be covering the following concepts:

Measurement Achievements

Completion Achievements

Boring vs. Interesting Tasks

Achievement Difficulty

Goal Orientation

Measurement vs. Completion Achievements

The first branch in the taxonomy contrasts Measurement and Completion achievements, which describe two distinct conditions under which we reward players for their actions.

Measurement achievements are given to players for completing a task to a certain degree. Their performance can be measured against another player’s performance, their own performance, or some standard set by game designers.

An example of this would be the star rating used in Angry Birds, which gives the player a number of stars based upon how well they beat the level. A measurement achievement can be likened to feedback, because it is evaluative in nature. The literature regarding the use of feedback in training and education indicates that feedback is beneficial to players because it allows them to reflect on their performance in relation to goals they have set for themselves.

This reflection increases the player’s perception of competence, which in turn increases, their intrinsic motivation — a term used to describe a task one finds inherently rewarding. That increase in perceived competence could also mediate the negative effects of other design decisions, like overusing rewards, which decrease intrinsic motivation.

On the other hand, completion achievements do not tell the player how well they’ve performed the task; instead they are offered as an award once a task is completed. Completion achievements can be split into two subcategories: performance contingent achievements and non-performance contingent achievements. Performance contingent achievements require skill to complete while non-performance contingent achievements are awarded for simply being present.

Performance contingent completion achievements, like those received for finishing a dungeon for the first time in World of Warcraft, can be better understood by reviewing what we know about the use of rewards as an extrinsic motivator. Some incentive programs have been shown to have a significant positive effect on task performance. However these types of rewards can decrease a player’s sense of autonomy, especially when given in excess. This decreased sense of
autonomy leads to lower intrinsic motivation.

Rewards also create an artificial ceiling for performance at the reward threshold. Once players have earned the reward, they are unlikely to continue on with the task that they were persuaded to do. For game developers this translates into the replay value of their game. Using rewards makes players less likely to take risks as they do not want to hurt their chances of being rewarded. This is especially relevant to rewards used in video games where designers wish to encourage creative and experimental play.

Non-performance contingent achievements, like earning a tabard or a pet for attending an in-game event, have no negative effect on intrinsic motivation. However these types of rewards do not have a performance measure, so players are unlikely to be interested in earning them unless they are paired with some sort of social reinforcement.

Best practice: Use measurement achievements instead of completion achievements to increase intrinsic motivation through feedback.

Boring vs. Interesting Tasks

Achievements are earned for the completion of a task or series of tasks. These required actions will fall on a spectrum ranging from boring to exciting from the player’s perspective. If a task is boring the reward structure associated with it has to be different from tasks that are inherently interesting to the player.

Boring tasks (such as trade skills in MMOs) can be paired with extrinsic motivators, like achievements, in order for players to engage in them. Because players are not inclined to do these tasks on their own, intrinsic motivation is unaffected by the use of rewards as an incentive.

There are two common strategies used to motivate people to engage in dull task. The first strategy is to make the player aware of the inherent value of the task through the wording of the achievement.

An example of this would be the “Lifesaver” achievement in Deadliest Catch: Sea of Chaos, which is given for rescuing a crewmember. The use of the term “Lifesaver” implies that the task is important because you are helping others.

The second strategy is to add additional rules or fantasy to the task itself, which is what all achievements do at their most basic level.

Interesting tasks which the player would engage in without any form of additional motivation do not need to be reinforced with rewards. Players will engage in these tasks without any coaxing, so achievements (especially those that are completion achievements) should be used sparingly.

Instead of trying to create artificial interest in a task the achievements should be attentional, in that they focus the player’s attention on important lessons or strategies for the task. This could improve player performance by scaffolding “hints” about what the most effective strategy is.

A good example of this would be the achievement “The Flying Heal Bus” in StarCraft II, which leads players to utilize a specific unit more effectively.

Best practice: Reward players for boring tasks and give them feedback for interesting ones. Make achievements for interesting tasks attentional.

Achievement Difficulty

The difficulty of achievements is addressed twice by designers. First, the actual difficulty of achievements needs to be on a level that is attainable but challenging to the players. Second, a player’s self-efficacy for the task(s) associated with the achievement must be high enough that they feel confident in attempting it.

Achievements should provide challenging goals for players to fulfill as moderate difficulty leads to superior gains in performance and a greater sense of accomplishment upon completion. However, achievements that are too difficult will not even be attempted by players. However, those that are too easy will be completed quickly, and won’t provide an adequate challenge. A common strategy to keep in-games tasks interesting is to provide alternative objectives for
those players who have reached a mastery level of performance.

Player self-efficacy (which refers to an individual’s perception about their own ability to produce a desired result for a specific task) is another important factor that game designers must consider. Increasing player self-efficacy is important because it has been linked to increased goal commitment, increased strategy creation and use, and a more positive response to negative feedback.

There are four factors that designers can address in order to affect a player’s self-efficacy. The first is their level of expertise on the subject matter. This is another important reason to make sure there are achievements available for players at all skill levels.

Seeing people around you succeed — or vicarious experience — is the second factor that influences self-efficacy. This effect is likely to be particularly powerful if the person being observed appears to be at the same ability level of the observer. Examples of utilizing this in games are leaderboards for online games or the “brags” in systems like OnLive.

Social persuasion (giving someone a verbal boost) is the third method of influencing self-efficacy. This can be as simple as telling someone “good job” after a performance or the “50 NOTE STREAK!” messages that appear in Guitar Hero. How a person feels is the fourth factor, which includes stress level, emotional condition, and perceived physical state.

Best practice: Make achievements challenging for the greatest returns in player performance and enjoyment. Phrase achievements and design interactions to increase player self-efficacy.

Goal Orientation

A player’s goal orientation must be considered when designing achievements as it will influence how they experience a game through goals they set for themselves. There are two types of goal orientation which are commonly referred to as performance orientation and mastery orientation. Players who favor a performance orientation are concerned with other people’s assessment of their competence. Players who have a mastery orientation are concerned more with
improving their proficiency.

Games tend to push players toward a performance orientation as they are constantly emphasizing direct goals like time and points earned. Unfortunately, players who gravitate toward this type of orientation take fewer in-game risks and spend less time exploring, afraid that doing so might affect their score.

This occurs frequently in first person shooters where players use the same weapons and tactics over and over again because they think it is the best way to optimize their kill to death ratio. However, research has shown that when individuals are given performance oriented goals they typically perform better only with simple, non-complex tasks.

To balance out player predisposition towards performance orientation designers must actively try to instill mastery orientation in the goals and feedback they create. There are several benefits associated with having a mastery orientation.

Players who have this mindset will accept errors and seek challenging tasks that provide them the opportunity to develop their competencies. When given mastery goals players will have higher self-efficacy and utilize more effective strategies. Research has also shown that people given mastery oriented goals perform better on complex tasks.

To help foster this type of orientation designers should create achievements that acknowledge the effort players are putting forth and support them during challenges. Games should treat errors and mistakes the players make as an opportunity to provide diagnostic feedback and encouragement.

The names and wording of achievements are very important when trying to effectively communicate this. For example Heavy Rain’s “So Close…” trophy, which is given to players for reaching, yet failing, the completion of a difficult task, could be seen as encouragement and recognition of effort.

In contrast, a similar achievement in Guitar Hero III, named “Blowing It”, is titled in such a way that it could be perceived as discouraging.

Best practice: For complex tasks requiring creativity or complicated strategies try to instill a mastery orientation. For simple or repetitive tasks instill a performance orientation. Try to keep new players, who are still learning how to play, in a mastery orientation.

For more information on these topics check out the following sources:

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985b). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum.

Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (2001). Extrinsic rewards and intrinsic motivation in education: Reconsidered once again. Review of Educational Research, 71(1), 1-27.

Eisenberger, R., & Cameron, J. (1996). Detrimental effects of reward: Reality or myth? American Psychologist, 51(11), 1153-1166.

Lepper, M. R., & Gilovich, T. (1982). Accentuating the positive: Eliciting generalized compliance from children through activity-oriented requests. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42(2), 248-259.

Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey. American Psychologist, 57 (9), 705-717.

Bandura, A. (1999). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. In R. F. Baumeister, R. F. Baumeister (Eds.) , The self in social psychology (pp. 285-298). New York, NY US: Psychology Press.

Seijts, G. H., Latham, G. P., Tasa, K., & Latham, B. W. (2004). Goal Setting and Goal Orientation: An Integration of Two Different Yet Related Literatures. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2), 227-239.

Winters, D., & Latham, G. P. (1996). The effect of learning versus outcome goals on a simple versus a complex task. Group & Organization Management, 21(2), 236-250.

[In the second part of his three-part series, PhD researcher and game designer Lucas Blair continues to present underpinnings in contemporary research which will help formulate best practices for designing in-game achievements. You can read part 1 here.]

Now, to recap. As I wrote in the original piece, there is an established body of scientific study covering a wide range of topics, which should guide the design of achievements. In this article series, I will be sharing a taxonomy of achievement design features created by deconstructing how achievements are currently used in games.

Canada Game Conference

The goal of this exercise is to distill mechanisms of action out of achievement designs, which have been shown by research to affect performance, motivation,
and attitudes.

This taxonomy, although intended to be comprehensive, is likely to be subject to debate and future revisions. For the time being however, I think it is a good jumping off point for a discussion that must be had if we are to ever effectively harness the potential of achievements.

Now, onward to the new content. In part two I will be covering the following concepts:

* Expected vs. Unexpected Achievements

* When Achievement Notification Occurs

* Achievement Permanence

* Who Can See Earned Achievements?

Expected vs. Unexpected Achievements

When a player earns an achievement, the notification they receive can come as a total surprise or as the finish line they were striving for. The expectation that a player has when starting a game stems from the design decision to let them know what they can achieve. Players either know what achievements can be earned before they play a game, or they come upon them unexpectedly during play. Expected and unexpected achievements have different effects on players and can both be utilized to improve player experience.

Expected achievements allow players to set goals for themselves before they begin. There are four well-established benefits to having players set goals for themselves. First, goals will allow the player to have objectives and allocate their resources to complete them. This could mean brushing up on certain skills, setting aside extra time, or asking a friend for help. Second, having a goal increases the amount of effort someone is willing to put into something. For game makers this will directly translate into more play time.

As someone who spent many hours pursuing the “Salty” meta-achievement in World of Warcraft — in which a player must earn all fishing achievements — I can personally attest to what time-sinks they can be.

Third, players who have goals are much more likely to not give up when facing a difficult task in a game, as compared to players without such goals who quit playing once the going gets too tough. Fourth, players who establish goals for themselves will acquire new knowledge and skills in order to meet those goals.
This is also important to game makers, because those players who obtain new skills will in turn want to play your game more.

In addition to the benefits of goal-setting, expected achievements also allow players to create a schema, or a mental model, of gameplay before they begin. Players then refer to this schema in order to make sense of how the game is structured, and what actions they need to do in order to succeed. If a player purchases a new game and looks over all the achievements they can earn, they will develop a better understanding of the game itself. In fact, schema creation
is often similarly used in training programs to help increase user performance.

On the other end of the spectrum are unexpected achievements. Unexpected achievements are relatively uncommon in video games, but can also have potential benefits to players. One such perk would be encouraging experimental play.

An extreme example of this strategy can be seen in the game Achievement Unlocked, in which players can earn quirky achievements for almost everything they do. Although the developers intended it to be a jab at the overuse of game achievements, Achievement Unlocked effectively illustrates the metagame that can be created through convincing players to run and jump around the screen randomly in hopes of earning all the mystery achievements.

Best Practice: Primarily use expected achievements so players can establish goals for themselves and create a schema of the game. Make sure achievement descriptions accurately reflect what needs to be done by the player and why it is important. Unexpected achievements can be used sparingly to encourage creative play.

When Achievement Notification Occurs

After an achievement is earned, the player must be made aware of their accomplishment. Players can be notified immediately while play is still ongoing, or after some amount of time has passed — at a natural break in the action. The decision between using immediate and delayed notifications should be influenced by game type as well as the player’s level of experience.

Achievement notifications that occur during play, like those in World of Warcraft, are a form of immediate feedback. Studies have shown that immediate feedback can improve learning and efficiency. This is especially important when using measurement achievements that directly relate to player performance.

It should be noted, however, that newer players will benefit more from this type of feedback than more experienced players. As players become more experienced, giving them increasingly delayed feedback will be more effective, as it gives them an opportunity to evaluate their own performance.

Another important consideration when giving players an achievement notification during play is the potential obtrusiveness of the alert itself. A disruptive alert could break the player’s flow state, or what they often call “the zone”, with unfavorable results.

When in a state like this, the outside world melts away, time becomes irrelevant, and focus is increased — this is probably a common experience you’ve experienced when you play your favorite game.

Players who are in a flow state have increased motivation to continue playing and experience more enjoyment, so disrupting this sensation with an in-your- face achievement may not be ideal.

In order to avoid distracting the player, games that require a lot of mental muscle (such as those in the RTS genre) will delay when they notify the player about earned achievements. Games like StarCraft which have clearly-defined play sessions tend to give players achievement notification after a natural break in play.

These types of notifications also have the benefit of acting like delayed feedback, which has been shown to produce increased retention when learning something new. So a player who performs an action for the first time in a new game and recognized for it a little while after the fact is more likely to remember how to perform it in future game sessions.

Best Practice: For games with no clear break in play, give immediate feedback with an unobtrusive popup accompanied by a longer explanation available after play. For games with clearly defined play sessions and those that require a greater deal of concentration it is better to use delayed notification. Try to give new players immediate feedback and give more experienced players delayed feedback.

Long after a player earns an achievement, they may want to reflect on the experience. Permanent achievements allow players to relive their former glory while impermanent ones exist only when the player is first notified.

Permanent achievements come in two varieties: digitally tangible and stored lists. These terms basically reflect the difference between the reward you get for earning an achievement and a catalogued description of the achievement. The tangibility of a digital item is an abstract concept, because the item only exists in a virtual world. However, an item that is “digitally tangible”, like a pet or a tabard given as a reward, can be manipulated by the player and admired by others just like a physical reward.

Be careful: if all of the same rules that apply to rewards in the real world apply to rewards in a digital one, there should be some concern about the overuse of digitally tangible rewards. Rewards have been shown to decrease intrinsic otivation (one’s natural desire to do something), lower the player’s sense of self-determination, and decrease the likelihood that a player will return to a task.

Stored lists of earned achievements, on the other hand, like those featured on Xbox Live, allow players to reflect on their accomplishments long after they have earned them. The act of reflecting on past events will give the players a greater understanding of the experience through recall.

Temporary achievements, like the phrases “Unstoppable” or “God-Like” in first person shooters, amount to verbal reinforcements. Unlike tangible achievements, these verbal boosts increase intrinsic motivation and do not infringe on the player’s sense of self determination. After the notification is gone, any record of the achievement disappears.

Best Practice: Give players the opportunity to go over their earned achievements using some kind of stored list. Digitally tangible rewards are a great incentive, but won’t keep the player around after the reward is earned.

Who Can See Earned Achievements?

Achievements that a player has earned are often visible to others in single player and multiplayer games. What information is shared varies by game. Some games take the decision out of the player’s hands. These mandatory systems make an individual’s achievements an open book. Player-defined achievement settings, like those in FarmVille and StarCraft II, give the player the ability to decide what they want to share.

Social approval is a big part of why people play video games. Making earned achievements visible to others will encourage players to earn them for recognition. Social recognition has been shown to have a positive effect on performance when used as an incentive.

Canadian Game Conference

Making earned achievements visible also gives the player’s peers the opportunity to see the reward and decide if they want it for themselves. Striving for and eventually earning those rewards will improve their self-efficacy, their belief that they can accomplish other in-game tasks.

Having visible achievements can also act like a gaming resumé. Another player’s earned achievements might reveal that they would make a good teammate or someone to ask for help.

Earned achievements that are visible to the community have potential downsides, however. Earned achievements that act as a resumé, as discussed above, can have the unintended consequence of excluding players.

This phenomenon often takes place in MMOs, where players ask potential teammates to link a completed achievement before allowing them to participate in game events. This creates a Catch-22 situation, where players must have experience in order to gain experience. Another problem with relying on social recognition as a motivator is that it is not a good predictor of future performance, once the recognition has been doled out or is no longer available.

Best Practice: Making earned achievements viewable to other players is a powerful incentive. To prevent players from being excluded because of their lack of experience, create achievements for players who take other players under their wing. Let players display a few achievements they are proud of to increase motivation and highlight their play style.

[In the second part of his three-part series, PhD researcher and game designer Lucas Blair continues to present underpinnings in contemporary research which will help formulate best practices for designing in-game achievements. You can read part 1 here, and part 2 here.]

Now, to recap. As I wrote in the original piece, there is an established body of scientific study covering a wide range of topics, which should guide the design of achievements. In this article series, I will be sharing a taxonomy of achievement design features created by deconstructing how achievements are currently used in games.

The goal of this exercise is to distill mechanisms of action out of achievement designs, which have been shown by research to affect performance, motivation, and attitudes.

This taxonomy, although intended to be comprehensive, is likely to be subject to debate and future revisions. For the time being however, I think it is a good jumping off point for a discussion that must be had if we are to ever effectively harness the potential of achievements.

In the first two installments of this series, the topics were mostly conceptual and covered a wide range of material including performance measurement, player motivation, and information presentation. For part three, I will be tying up a few loose ends by discussing some specific types of achievements and the potential consequences of their use.

In part three I will be covering the following concepts:

* Negative Achievements

* Achievements as Currency

* Incremental and Meta-Achievements

* Competitive Achievements

* Non-competitive Cooperative Achievements

Negative Achievements

Most achievements are given to a player after they have done something noteworthy and positive. However, some achievements are given to players for a notable performance at the other end of the spectrum. When a player fails epically, they may earn a negative achievement. Examples of negative achievements include the Command & Conquer 3 achievement “awarded” to a player who loses a ranked game to someone 20 places below them in the official rankings, and the “Getting My Ass Kicked” trophy for repeatedly dying in PS3′s God of War.

Negative achievements are the digital equivalent of pouring salt on a wound. Earning this type of achievement can cause players to lose their sense of competence and independence, which will make the game they are playing feel less fulfilling. If players know that there are negative achievements in the game, they will try their hardest to avoid them. Avoidance goals that are constantly in the back of the player’s mind can be tiring and will make the overall experience less enjoyable.

Negative achievements can also make design flaws in the game a double whammy. Someone who dies repeatedly due to poor level design or a broken mechanic is not going to take a “you suck” achievement in stride. The player’s response will be to blame the game and not themselves.

Best practice: Don’t use negative achievements. Provide feedback within the system that can assist struggling players.

Achievements as Currency

Earned achievements could be used as virtual currency in games. Players may receive such currency in the form of points, coins, or stars, and later use them to purchase in-game items or real world objects. Microstransaction-driven games like League of Legends sometimes also have an alternative currency that is earned through gameplay.

Achievements are an obvious choice for a metric when giving out virtual currency. They are memorable moments, with defined requirements, that are already important to players. Using achievements as currency, however, may have a wide range of effects on players.

There is a great deal of research on giving money as an incentive for performance. Monetary rewards have greater returns on task performance than tangible rewards.

This is probably due to the fact that acquiring currency allows a player to decide what they want to purchase with it. This takes the responsibility of choosing an appropriate reward out of the hands of designers.

School systems have recently used monetary rewards with some success. In some cases class attendance, test scores, and even the likelihood of attending college all improved when monetary rewards were offered. Other studies reported similar increased accomplishment, but only when rewards were tied to inputs rather than outputs.

This means that students were rewarded for things like the amount of time they spent studying, but not directly for getting a particular grade. The idea being that if students are paid for good behaviors, the grades will take care of themselves.

The other side of the argument concerning currency is the same one that is often made against tangible rewards. Currency rewards have been shown to decrease intrinsic motivation for the recipients of the reward. Players will end up caring about the reward system more than the game itself. More than one game company has exploited this kind of reward system in order to keep players strung out on boring tasks. Currency systems, like other reward programs, may also lower player creativity by inadvertently encouraging a hyper focus on the reward path.

Best practice: Offer players currency for completing tasks instead of rewards to give them a greater sense of control. Use a currency system to enhance a game, but don’t attempt to make currency acquisition the main reason players engage in an activity.

Incremental and Meta-Achievements

Most of the time achievements are earned for completing a single task. Incremental and meta-achievements, however, are given for completing more than one task.

Incremental achievements are awarded in a chain for performing the same task through scaling levels of difficulty. Examples of incremental achievements are killing 250, 500, and 1000 enemies in an FPS, and earning different colored ribbons in FarmVille.

Meta-achievements are earned for completing a series of achievements that are for different tasks, for instance earning the title of “Chef” by completing all cooking-related achievements in World of Warcraft.

Both incremental and meta-achievements can be used as a type of scaffolding, a “training wheels” approach used in teaching. Here, players are given a rather seemingly complex task to do, only it’s broken up into smaller pieces and sequenced like a training program.

Breaking the task up into pieces also has the side-benefit of helping players create a schema about how the more complex task is structured.

Incremental and meta-achievements usually take extended periods of time to complete. This is similar to long-term incentive programs. These types of programs have been shown to elicit greater performance gains than short-term programs, which give rewards for single actions. Another benefit of these types of long- term goals is that players will spend more time in the game trying to complete them.

These types of achievements, however, can have a potential downside. If players feel like they are only following a trail of breadcrumbs with little self- direction they may lose their sense of autonomy. The number of achievements, the spacing between them, and the amount of challenge each one provides are important things to keep in mind.Best Practice: Use these types of achievements to hold the player’s interest for longer periods of time and guide them to related activities. Make the spacing between incremental achievements, both in time and physical location, separated enough so that players don’t feel too controlled.

Competitive Achievements

Competitive achievements require players to face off with one another in either direct confrontations or indirectly through their scores on solo tasks. This type of achievement can be completed individually or in teams where members work together to defeat other groups of players.

Some research indicates that competition can increase overall enjoyment and attitude towards a given task. Being successful in a competition has been shown to increase intrinsic motivation by influencing a person’s perception of their own competence, and such competitive environments have also demonstrated increased performance on simple repetitive tasks.

Computer science classes in particular have noted success in their implementation of competition to make classes more interesting.

Although some studies have seen positive results from the implementation of competitive environments, other studies indicate that under certain circumstances competition should be avoided.

More often than not, competitive environments have a tendency to impede the learning process. This is in part due to the egocentric behavior that competitive environments often induce, which in turn make people less likely to help one another. Competition has also been shown to have a negative effect on the self- efficacy of learners. This makes players rate themselves and their teammates more harshly, especially when they lose.

Players who have a higher level of skill are more likely to enjoy competitive achievements and be less affected by the negative aspects. They will be at a place where the game is familiar to them and will not be as stressed out with the addition of competition.

Another consideration is the motivation of the individual players. Players that are high in achievement motivation enjoy competitive tasks to a greater extent and have more intrinsic interest than their counterparts who are low in achievement motivation. Gamers in general may have a higher overall achievement motivation, which can also vary depending on the game type. It is important to understand your target demographic and give players what they are
most comfortable with.

Best Practice: If competitive achievements are used in a game, make them available only after players are comfortable with gameplay and no longer learning the ropes.

Non-Competitive Cooperative Achievements

Cooperative achievements are earned by players working towards a goal together in a game. These types of achievements are most common in multi-player games where players can interact with peers. The achievements can be rewards for group tasks like killing a monster, or built into multiplayer games to encourage teamwork, like earning 1000 assisted kills in a first person shooter.

Most research supports the use of cooperative environments to improve performance. Cooperative settings have been associated with academic achievement, increased self-esteem, and higher positivity when evaluating peers. Incentive programs that require teamwork have a greater effect on performance than those that can be accomplished by an individual.

Game Advertising Online

Another great benefit of working cooperatively is that it gives players a wider range of goals that they may not be able to complete on their own. To facilitate this, achievements should encourage veteran players to engage with those less experienced.

The sidekick system in City of Heroes is a great example of this. Research shows that people who are protégés in businesses have a greater promotion rate and more job satisfaction than individuals who were not mentored. The mentors also benefit from these types of systems by seeing their own performance and social status increased.

Although cooperation has many benefits, there are some risks associated with this type of environment. One risk is attitude polarization in groups, which often leads to more cautious or risky decision-making as a whole. In these instances, team members will collectively make poor decisions they otherwise wouldn’t if given the opportunity to decide by themselves.

Another problem that can affect groups is process loss, which can take place if the additional workload from coordinating communication and assisting others hinders group performance. The communication difficulties that can cause process loss could be accentuated in games because of the limitation of the available technology. A good example of this takes place during raids in MMOs, when some group members do not have access to voice chat.

Another problem caused by group size is social loafing. This is a problem in larger groups where an individual’s performance is hidden and they will put forth less effort.

Best practice: To foster a cooperative environment, offering achievements for more advanced players to assist less experienced players is an option. The groups for cooperative achievements should be kept relatively small to decrease social loafing and process loss. The metrics used for earning achievements should assess individual performances within the group setting.

This literature review has hopefully shed some light on a pretty complex subject that I think deserves quite a bit more research. One of the difficulties of this sort of review is that we are borrowing research from multiple fields of study, and bending it to fit our needs as game designers.

To remedy some of the murkiness surrounding a few of the topics, RETRO lab is currently running studies on specific aspects of the taxonomy in order to strengthen the case for achievement design. These studies swap different types of achievements in games and then evaluate how each can affect players, examining factors such as amount of enjoyment and time spent playing.

As findings from the studies become available our lab will be sure to keep the gaming community informed of any significant findings. Thanks for all the comments and discussion over the past few weeks. I hope the debate over achievement design continues and that these articles have at the very least been a catalyst for discussion.

A special thanks to Dr. Clint Bowers for the guidance, as well as, James Bohnsack, Katie Procci, and the rest of RETRO Lab for all the help.


上一篇:

下一篇: