作者：Oscar Clark

当我坐在桌子前时，我想到这是2015年我的第一天工作日，并且意识到在今年自己将有机会考虑一个全新的游戏项目。是的，说实话，这是我经常想到的事，但在今天不同的是，比起拼接一些理念或者创造一些半完成品，我想要以一种全新的视野去看待我将在新一年所创造的游戏类型。

Oscar Clark（fromdevelop-online）

当听到有人从经典RPG/桌面理念开始设计游戏时，我通常会认为游戏设计是关于一些大型内容，如建造世界，英雄的旅程等等与硬核机制相关联的内容。我喜欢想象这些基于游戏世界的元素以及它们如何彼此联系去创造更加广阔的体验。

然而在短短的几年里，我的视角发生了改变。现在的我认为自己过分专注于游戏世界元素其实便是在混淆自己所认为的游戏核心。

在游戏的时候玩家总是会有一些渴望的内容。对于有些玩家来说可能是伴随着完成一道谜题的成就感。而对于其他玩家来说，也有可能是逃离世俗的生活。这些渴望之所以会不同于其它媒体便是玩家愿意留在游戏中继续前进的原因。

这提醒了我机制是创造核心吸引力的基础。如果我在这个充满竞争性的市场中获得了机会，我便需要创造出具有深入吸引力且是玩家愿意反复尝试的机制。

问题在于大多数人（游戏邦注：特别是大众市场中的玩家）对于理解游戏机制根本就不感兴趣。这就像艺术一样：大多数非艺术家并不知道自己喜欢什么，但也说不出具体原因。然而如果将其与优秀的图像和音乐结合在一起时，人们便能够有效地理解故事内容。这便是游戏世界元素的重要性，能够让玩家本能地沉浸于我们的机制中。

所以我在寻找的是能够置于环境中的简单且具有重复性的机制。这种关注让我能够在投入大量时间和资源进行创造之前快速测试自己的理念是否可行—-特别重要的是，我根本没有足够的时间和资源可供浪费。这也是我能够自己创造原型的内容—-虽然我仍然在学习如何使用Unity。实际上，我可以先在纸上或使用粘土测试这些机制的理念。

与许多设计师一样，我也想了无数游戏机制，并且也测试了许多机制，其中一些机制具有不错的效果。那我该如何决定要选择哪个机制继续创造呢？

在思考我们的机制是否具有乐趣的同时，我们也必须考虑它们是否能够确保玩家继续游戏。我并不期待自己能够凭借这款游戏变成亿万富翁，我的目标只是赚到足够的钱让自己能够继续做这件事。但考虑到游戏的中等收益是400美元，如此我要想以此谋生便会很困难。如果我不能最大化玩家用户粘性，我的潜在收益便会大大减少，如果我尝试着重新开始，我也不能只是复制曾经带给我灵感的游戏结构。但不要误解我—-我并不是在考虑自己将要使用怎样的业务模式。这是之后才需要讨论的内容，但这也是取决于我所作出的选择。

我希望自己的游戏具有重复性的另外一个原因便是艺术。我想要从自己付钱所获得的资产中得到最多价值。在圣诞节的时候我玩了许多主机游戏，并发现自己总是过度关注于一些路过的细节。即留意那些我没有理由遇到的关卡的角落，但却不是为了确保自己是否遗漏掉任何掉落的战利品。

不仅如此，我还喜欢带有熟悉感的游戏。我想要摸清楚城堡周围的路。我希望溪谷让人觉得就像家一般。在很多游戏中我只有在做完所有事并四处走动时才能获得这种感觉；如此我便没有再次回到游戏中的理由了。为什么“所有强大的”敌人不重新占领我从他们手上抢过来的游戏世界呢？为什么在这些领域中不会再次出现新的冒险？

重复性能够用于创造旅程：游戏世界中过去的时间以及新冒险的触发物便是利用图像的熟悉度，同时让新领域的呈现变得更让人印象深刻。

但重复性也具有一个问题，即无数漫无目的的体验将不能有效地诱发玩家的想象力。我们需要进程感并设定目标。我们需要给予继续游戏的玩家奖励并确保这些奖励具有意义。几乎每一款游戏都拥有某种类型的分数机制，但到底有多少玩家是真正融入这些分数中呢？

让我觉得自己在不断前进的成就感是一回事。它可以发挥真正的作用，但只是为了游戏而不断获得点数是不能让我感到满足的；只有确保获取这些点数的难度会超越我们的挫败感极限而不断提升才能让我们更有动力继续游戏。

添加其他玩家会更有帮助，因为这让我们能够与其他人比较分数和时间，但同时还存在一个伴随着竞争机制的基本问题。游戏中只能存在一个赢家，其他人在意识到自己不能获胜时将会受挫。即使当我们限制与朋友之间的竞争时，这种情况也会发生。我们可以使用障碍系统或联盟去缓解这一问题，但即使如此仍会存在一些悖论。

不过我们不需要将自己局限在一套奖励中，我们也无需赋予每个成就分数。打开新领域，获得独特的定制内容，留给朋友一个标记—-所有的这些都能够与呈现进程结合在一起。为什么进程需要是线性的？为什么很多游戏都不提供进程选择并使用真实困境？我所作出的选择可能并不能够推动玩家重新玩一款游戏。

但别担心，我并不是说你必须在选择机制前解决所有的重复性方面。因为我在之后才会考虑业务模式，所以我只会着眼于那些有可能维持下去的机制，如目的感以及伴随着不同奖励方法的进程。我会在之后的设计过程中着眼于自己真正想要执行的详细内容。

对于我来说最后需要考虑的是范围。让机制去满足用户的需求的能力与重复性一样重要。要求大量手动平衡设置或关卡设计的机制具有危险性，因为即使它们是成功的，你也很难赶上玩家的需求。玩家是比你想象中对于内容更难得到满足的消费者。

然而范围并不只是关于你拥有多少关卡的问题。这同时也是关于你是否能够轻松添加全新的替代变量。你能想到多少关于机制的调整？对于我来说，《Candy Crush Soda Saga》便向我们示范了这种思考方式。让我们以《宝石迷阵》理念为例并通过使用时间，回合数，不同的升级道具，可替代的组块而将一系列调整内容添加到旅程系统中，你便能够获得最初的《Candy Crush Saga》。添加液体会留到网格中而引起宝石向上漂浮而不是向下走的机制。这真的很棒。这是能够与玩家达成共鸣的一种机制。

所以当我坐在这里，思考着我的下一款游戏时，这些变量便是我正在考虑的内容，并且我将通过独自创造原型去测试它们。也许这并不是最完美的，但却能让我在进一步创造前将其呈现在人们面前并获得有关理念的反馈。

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

A fresh start: What to consider when designing a new game

By Oscar Clark

As I sit at my desk, it’s my first day back to work in 2015 and I’m realising that this year I have that wonderful opportunity to consider a new game project. Okay, to be fair it’s something I’m constantly thinking about, but what’s different today is that rather than taking a patchwork of ideas and half finishing them, I want to take a fresh look at the kind of game I will make this year.

As someone who started out with classic RPG/Board concepts, I used to think game design was all about the big things: world building and the hero’s journey, all tied up with the core mechanic. I love to get caught up in imagining these gameworld-focused elements and how they interact with each other to create the wider experience.

However, especially in the last couple of years, my perspective has changed. I now see my focus on these gameworld elements as a distraction to what I now believe is the core of what makes games work.

There is something in the moment of play that gamers crave. For some, it’s the sense of achievement that comes with the completion of a puzzle. For others, it’s an escape from when their lives become too mundane – or indeed too intense. What makes this craving different from other mediums is that it’s something where the player is the force behind progressing the experience.

That suggests to me that the mechanic is fundamental to creating a core hook. If I’m going to have a chance in this intensely competitive market, I need to have a mechanic that will deeply engage and ideally be something players wish to do repeatedly.

The trouble is that most people – especially mass-market players – don’t have any interest in understanding mechanics. It’s like art: most non-artists know what they like, but can’t tell you why. People do, however, understand stories especially when combined with great imagery and amazing music. That’s where the gameworld elements become essential to allow them to escape and engage with our mechanics at an almost instinctive level.

So what I’m looking for is a simple repeatable mechanic that I can put into a context. This kind of focus allows me to test my ideas quickly before making huge investments in time and resources – especially important as I don’t have any time or resources to waste! It’s also something I can largely prototype myself – albeit, crudely as I’m still only learning to use Unity. In fact, I can usually test the idea of these mechanics first on paper or using modelling clay and so on.

Like many designers I have ideas for countless game mechanics, many of which I’ve tested and some of which clearly offer some element delight. How do I decide which is the one to move forward with?

As well as thinking if our mechanics are enjoyable, we also have to consider whether they will keep people playing. I’m not expecting to become a billionaire with this game; my objective is to make enough money to be able to keep doing this. But given the median revenue for a game is $400, making a living is a big challenge. If I don’t maximise the player engagement, I will significantly limit my potential return and given that I’m trying to make a fresh start, I don’t have to simply copy the structure of the games that inspired me. Don’t get me wrong – I’m not thinking about what business model I’m going to use yet. That will come in a later article, but it’s an inevitable shadow on my choices.

There is another reason I want my games to be repeatable. Art. I want to get the most value possible out of the assets I commission (there is no way I’ll do the art myself!). I’ve been playing a lot of console games over Christmas and almost weep because of the attention to detail put into areas that I only randomly travelled to. Corners of levels which I had no gameplay reason to encounter, other than to be sure I hadn’t missed any loot drops. How depressing.

But more than that, another aspect I enjoy about games is the sense of the familiar. I actively want to learn my way around the castle. I want that valley to feel like home. In too many games I get that feeling just as I run out of things to do until I go elsewhere; I have no later reason to return. Why don’t the ‘all powerful’ enemies try to retake the areas of the game world I’ve taken from them? Why can’t new adventures happen in these spaces over time?

Repetition can be used to create journeys: the passing of time in the gameworld and the triggers to new adventures leveraging the familiarity of the artwork, as well as making the unlocking of new spaces even more memorable.

But there is a problem with repeatability, and endless purposeless experience will fail to capture player’s imagination. We need a sense of progression and a target to aim for. We need to reward players for their continued engagement and make that reward meaningful. Almost every game has some kind of scoring mechanics, but how many players actively engage with those scores?

A personal sense of achievement that allows me to feel like I’m progressing is one thing. It can be really useful, but to continually gain points just for playing is unsatisfying and we churn; just as to find the difficulty of obtaining those points increasing beyond our threshold of frustration will also make us churn.

Adding other players can help as it allows us to compare our scores and times with others like us, but there is a fundamental problem with competition-based mechanisms. There can only be one winner and everyone else will be frustrated once they recognise that they are unable to win. Even when we limit the competition to friends, this will still happen. We can mitigate this using handicap systems or leagues, but the paradox will remain.

But we don’t have to limit ourselves to one set of rewards, nor do we have to put scores on every aspect of achievement. Unlocking new spaces, gaining unique customisation, leaving a marker for a friend – all of these (and more) can combine to demonstrate progression. Why does progression have to be linear? Why don’t more games offer choices over progression and apply genuine dilemma to the outcomes? The choices I make can be as effective as a narrow failure to trigger players to repeat a game.

Don’t worry, I’m not suggesting that you have to solve every aspect of repeatability before selecting the mechanic you want to focus on. Just as my consideration of the business model is for later, I’m merely looking for a mechanic which has the potential to sustain such a sense of purpose and progression along with different reward methods. I’ll look at the details of what I actually want to implement much later in the design process.

The final consideration for me is a sense of scope. The ability for a mechanic to scale to the needs of an audience is just as important as repeatability. Mechanics which require a lot of manual balancing or level design are risky because, even if they are successful, you probably won’t be able to keep up with demand. Players are more insatiable consumers of content than you can imagine.

However, scope isn’t just a question of how many levels do you have. It’s also about how easily you can add in new alternative variables. How many twists on the mechanic can you think of? For me, Candy Crush Soda Saga demonstrates this way of thinking. Take the Bejewelled idea and add a relentless series of twists by using time, number of turns, different power-ups, alternative pieces and add them to a journey system, and you get the original Candy Crush Saga. How do you follow that? Add a mechanic where liquid pours into the grid causing gems to float upwards rather than fall down. That’s brilliant. That’s a mechanic that resonates with players.

So as I sit here, thinking about my next game, these are the variables I’m considering and testing by building a prototype for myself. It won’t be perfect but should allow me to show it to people and get feedback on the idea before I take it forward.

I won’t tell you what the game is going here (after all, I may never finish it) but if you see me at a conference feel free to ask and if there is time I’d love to get your feedback. (source:develop-online)