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

在开发过程中终止一个项目的想法

发布时间:2014-11-14 10:12:15 Tags:,,,,

作者:ADAM

Golem.de是来自德国的科技新闻源。最近他们就我的GDC欧洲演示“The Art of Killing Games”对我进行了访问。

1.你和你的团队是怎么知道何时该终结一个项目?你是否能够列举个例子?

这取决于项目的阶段。

在早期阶段(概念阶段),团队经常会从目标用户以及Wooga中的其他产品经理那里收集反馈。如果获得的回应不怎么样,那就表示游戏在市场上没有多少成功的希望,那么他们便可能选择停下来。

在原型开发阶段,如果用户测试员并不能理解概念,如果他们不能沉浸于原型中,如果他们觉得游戏只是一些不断重复的内容,那么团队有可能会决定在此防守。

随着游戏不断成形,我们将继续测试我们的假设:我们的定义和不同的功能是否真的可行?在很多情况下,在原型开发阶段的设计和想法有可能会在游戏完全成形时被彻底分解。最初的设计有时候并不可能一直持续下去,因为它可能不如在纸上看的那般有趣。这时候,我们不会立刻终止项目,我们还会以每个月为基础设定目标去修改这些问题,并做到我们需要做到的标准。在经过足够的尝试后,制作人将作出选择,是该继续坚持这一理念还是尝试其它理念?

2.你是否能够列举例子去解释到底是什么导致你们终止一个项目?在游戏设计和游戏质量下方是否还存在其它原因(如直接竞争等等)?

在最近被取消的游戏项目中最常出现的原因便是缺少长期潜能。我们不得不问自己:玩家是否会玩这款游戏一年?如果现在不能(游戏邦注:因为它仍处于早期的原型阶段),那么我们该添加什么功能去推动玩家玩一年的游戏?《Pearl’s Peril》和《果冻飞溅》便是我们所创造的且长时间受到玩家喜欢的游戏典例,所以我们也期待着新游戏能够更上一层楼。

当我们在讨论并决定项目命运时,直接竞争便会开始发挥作用。当创造了产品时,我们便会开始更多地理解我们的目标用户以及市场。有时候在经过几个月的开发后,我们会意识到开发这样的项目的风险远高于其成果的几率。即直接竞争将成为主要支配元素,而我们可能会认为自己的游戏缺少与众不同的功能。这就像是一颗很难咽下去的药丸。但我们会选择先停下来并开始着眼于进军市场的新方法。最后,我们可能不会发行产品,但我们也因为未进一步扩展项目而省下了许多时间和金钱,并且也避免了最终受挫。

3.是谁做出最终的决定,在团队内部是否进行足够的讨论?

制作人是决策制定者,它将参考CEO,工作室负责人以及团队的选择。制作人必须听取反馈,但是最终的决策都是由他制定的,即使这一决策有可能违背CEO。

这点非常重要,因为这赋予团队理念和执行的所有权。他们能够听取反馈,他们将清楚什么是错的,甚至当反馈是负面时,他们也清楚自己可以做出不同的决定。有时候团队能够证实他们所获得的反馈是错误的。而有时候团队则想要进一步观察别人是否能够证实他们是错误的。在这两种情况下我们都能获得很好的学习,团队也能够用一种积极的态度坚定自己能够做所有可以做的事。

4.有时候你们是否能够使用被取消的游戏中的某一部分(当成其它游戏中的资产)?

通常是不会的。

可能有一些代码适用于不同的游戏中,但是我们所创造的每一款游戏通常都是不同的。同样地,因为手机领域中的技术非常快速地发展着,所以我们最好能够保持灵活性并且不该只是致力于同一种技术或者维持累赘的内部技术。现在我们拥有一支混合团队分别使用着Unity和Cocos2D,因为每一种引擎都有其自身的开发优势和劣势。最后我觉得因为我们的发展速度太快了,所以开发者总是能够轻松摆脱那些无法维持的旧程序。

Unity(from pcgames)

Unity(from pcgames)

实质上,美术和设计总是不同的,所以它们不能在不同游戏间轮流使用。然而,当终止一个项目时,我们会让团队尽可能地分享彼此在项目过程中所学到的内容。确保通过分享新工具和新过程并将其用于之后的团队合作中。

在我们上次取消的项目团队中,我们使用的是Unity。在项目取消后我们团队中的许多成员转向了公司中其它有希望的项目中以确保他们能够使用新引擎开发项目。

5.也许你心里住着一个你觉得不应该取消的项目,或者至少你不确定取消是不是对的,你能否解释下原因?

其实并没有。

很少会出现哪些决定会让团队感到震惊。我们的团队总是很小并且设计参与度很高。他们会清楚地看到缺陷,并获得来自用户和公司的反馈,所以在很多情况下,我们的终止决定总是能得到理解—-大多都是因为游戏概念太过局限,我们可以想出一些更好的新理念。

有时候,人们会真心投入一个游戏项目,而这时候他们便很难接受取消的决定。这时候他们通常会低声说着“如果……会怎样?”或者“为什么我们不快速完成它?”

然而在应用商店的早期阶段,许多发行于手机上的免费游戏都是中核游戏,拥有一些较简单的游戏设计。这些游戏之所以能够轻松获得盈利是因为它们很容易进行营销,并且玩家可以轻松地找到它们。但是现在的市场已经不再适合中核游戏了。今天的市场对于一款成功的免费游戏的要求更加苛刻—-如果一支团队努力获得长期的用户留存,获得强大的盈利或者创造出具有强大易用性的核心机制,那么他们的游戏便会拥有非常强大的市场竞争力。

不管怎样,当你终止一个项目时总是会出现“如果……会怎样”的时刻,但比起致力于一个没有成功机会的项目好几年,我更愿意纠结于这样的时刻。

本文为游戏邦/gamerboom.com编译,拒绝任何不保留版权的转功,如需转载请联系:游戏邦

Golem.de Interview : “The Art of Killing Games”

by ADAM

Golem.de is a tech news source for Germany. Recently they did an interview with me regarding my GDC Europe Presentation “The Art of Killing Games”.

For the original content (In full german) : http://www.golem.de/news/wooga-die-kunst-ein-spiel-zu-killen-1408-108425.html

Here is the english version :

1) How do you and your team typically get the impression that it’s time to “kill” a project? Do you have an example of that?

This depends on the stage of a project.

During the early (concept) phases, the team will usually collect feedback from the target audience and other Product Managers around Wooga. If the excitement level is low, if there’s no signs of success in the market, then they will most likely stop.

During the prototype phase, if user testers aren’t understanding the concept, if they aren’t engaged with the prototype, if they feel like the game is the same thing over and over again, then the team will most likely stop it at this phase.

As the game then gets built into its full form, we continually test our assumptions : Are our defining and differentiating features actually working? In many cases, what was initially designed and thought of during the prototyping phase ends up breaking apart by the time the game gets to its full form. The original design just shows signs that it won’t last as long as we originally thought, its not nearly as fun as it sounded on paper. At this time we don’t just immediately kill the project — we then set goals on a month to month basis to fix these issues and get it to the point we need to. After enough attempts, the Product Lead has to make the choice — do we keep moving with this idea, or try something new?

2) Also, do you have an example of reasons that lead to killing a project? Are there other reasons beneath game design, game quality (like: direct competition,…)

The most common reason in recent game cancellations has been lack of long term potential. We have to ask : do we see players playing this game for a year? If not now (because its still an early prototype) what features do we see will pull players in for a year? Pearl’s Peril and Jelly Splash are excellent examples of how we’ve created a game that can last for a very long time, so we expect nothing but better out of our new games.

Direct Competition does come into play when we discuss and decide the fate of our projects. As the products are built we also start to understand much more about our target audience and the market. In some cases after a few months of development we realise that the risks of developing this project (the amount of time needed, the expertise required to hire) is just too high in comparison to chances of success and subsequent reward. A direct competitor could be dominating in the space, and we might believe that our differentiating features just aren’t enough. We’ve made this call in the past and its always a very tough pill to swallow. But we stop and start looking into new ways to attack the market. In the end, we may never launch the product, but we save so much frustration, so much time and so much money by not spreading ourselves thin across projects that we just don’t have full faith in.

3) Who is finally making the decision, are there lots of discussions and/or even arguments within the team?

The Product Lead is the decision maker, who takes the opinions of the CEO, their Head of Studio, and their team. The Product Lead has to listen to the feedback, but ultimately can make the final call, even if that final call goes against the CEO.

This is important because it gives teams the ownership of the idea and execution. They hear the feedback, they know what’s wrong, but even when the feedback is negative, they know they can make the call. In some cases the team has been correct and proven the feedback wrong. In some cases the team wanted one more shot to see if they could prove us wrong. In both cases we have great learnings and the teams have come out with a positive attitude knowing they did everything they could.

4) Is there sometimes a certain part of killed games you could use otherwise (some assets in another game)?

Typically no.

There are some bits of code that could potentially be moved between games, each game we work on is usually substantially different from the other. Also technology has been moving so quickly in the mobile space its good that we stay flexible and not commit to one technology or have to maintain a cumbersome internal tech. We’ve currently got a mix of teams working with Unity and Cocos2D, because each engine has its advantages and disadvantages for mobile development. In the end I feel like we’re much faster and that developers aren’t stuck with legacy code that is impossible to maintain.

Art and Design are always substantially different so they cannot be shifted from one game to another. However, after a project is cancelled we ask the team to share as many of their learnings as possible. Making sure to share knowledge of new tools and new processes to try on other teams.

In my last game team that was cancelled, we worked with Unity. Many of our team members after the cancellation were moved to other promising projects within the company to make sure they had the knowledge to develop projects with the new engine.

5) Maybe you have one example on a game where you personally now wish you hadn’t killed it – or at least are not sure -, and could elaborate on the reasons?

No, not really.

Rarely the decision comes as a shock to the team. The team is small and close to the design. They see the flaws, they know the feedback coming from users and the company, and in many cases the cancellation has come as a relief — the concept was too restrictive, lets relax and come up with something new.

In some cases people have really put their heart and soul into the game, in that case its very difficult to say no, or to accept it. There’s usually whispers of “what if” or “why don’t we just quickly get it out?” which are valid.

However, In the early years of the app store many free to play titles launched on mobile were mediocre and supported shallow free to play design. These games could still be profitable because it was easy to market and easy to be discovered. But the current marketplace is not a place for mediocre games. The requirements to be a successful free to play title today are long and daunting — if a team is struggling to get long term retention, to get strong monetization or to make their core mechanic accessible enough, then it really has no shot at competing in the top of the market.

Regardless, there will always be “what if” moments when you stop projects, but I’d rather have those than work on a multi-year project that has no chance of success.(source:mobilefreetoplay)

 


上一篇:

下一篇: