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

如何在游戏中创造更出色的难度

发布时间:2015-05-19 16:05:31 Tags:,,,,

作者:Taylor Bair

那些穿着装甲背心的人一直用短枪朝我射击;狙击手们使用内红点瞄准具对准了我那宝贵的头盖骨;Aztecan的死亡音乐不断回荡在我那乱成一团的脑子里。于是我便打开了《神秘海域3》的菜单并向下滑动到难度选择中,然后做出了一个难以想象的选择。

我深吸了一口气并点击了“非常简单”选项。

它先后带给了我一些困扰,但却是基于不同原因。

你看这并不只是关于电子游戏难度级别的问题—-如果它们是多余或必要的话。这是有关动机的问题—-不管是源自开发者还是游戏玩家的角度来看。这是关于什么元素激励我们去玩游戏,最终这也是关于什么元素从心理上激励到我们—-在关系中,决策制定方面以及生活中。

Uncharted(from gamasutra)

Uncharted(from gamasutra)

难度选择的传统模式会传达并激发玩家心中的某些感受,这不仅会带给玩家不利影响,也会影响到游戏设计。所以让我们通过分析我自己的开发以明确这一问题,我偶然发现一些对于游戏设计师和玩家的深远影响能够改变我们创造游戏与体验游戏的方式。

这又回到了激励层面上—-我们对未来的渴望,对自己的信任以及改善的意义。所以一开始我们将先说说传统的难度选择系统以及它对于我们的意义。

大家都在走的路

游戏开发者有许多害怕的事。这大多是隐藏在表面之下并会在我们经历充满压力的一天并躺在床上准备休息的时候冒出来。因为我们的生活非常多变,所以我们总是想要获得保障。而我们能够获得的最好的保障是什么呢?即我们的游戏对于所有人来说便是一切。

但是我们却不能都创造出《侠盗猎车手V》这样的游戏,所以开发者还需要发挥一定的创造性。我们理解有些玩家想要看到一个可靠的故事,有些玩家想要一些刺激的挑战,也有些玩家想要我们提供给他们的任何内容。

因此便诞生了难度选择。玩家能够通过按压按键去改变一系列较容易执行的编辑器。如此每个人便都能够获得胜利。

或者我们都会遭遇失败。

我们可以通过理解玩家动机去寻找原因。

玩家动机的核心

如果你是Dracula,你便拥有一堆的秘密。但我并不是Dracula,所以我只拥有一堆的愿望。

这也是我接近电子游戏的原因,我想要获得某些东西。乐趣吗?当然。娱乐?差不多。时间消耗?可能。

但是我们不能错认为这便是自己想要的一切。我们想要财富,快感,陪伴,谈笑,爆发,眼泪,逃避,以及一大堆其它东西。

而这些愿望的核心在于动机—-即能够一直推动着我们前进。它能够不断且有效地提供给我们愿望与执行,我们会在游戏未能做到这点的时候停下来。

这一切的核心非常简单:我们将基于不同方式得到激励,这些激励因子会影响我们对于挑战的反应。心理学家将动机分解为一些核心类别,其中两种类别引起了我们特别的关注:

“自我”激励因子

这种动机是源自我们的自我感知,当玩家以“我真的只关心故事”或“我没有时间去应对这些冲向我的愚蠢的射击手”或“你知道,如果我拥有更多耐心的话我便会更喜欢这款游戏”等方式去判断决定时,你便能够看到这种动机发挥作用。这通常会导致玩家选择降低难度级别。

那么谁会提升难度级别呢?也是基于同样的概念。即那些会说:“我喜欢挑战”或者“我是个偏执的完成主义者”或者“胜利的奖杯在召唤我”的玩家。

这些表达中的共同思路是:他们考虑的都是自己而不是游戏。玩家是核心。我们必须了解自己或组织有关自己的看法。

NatureofSelf(from gamasutra)

NatureofSelf(from gamasutra)

你经常会在带有难度级别选择的游戏中发现这种激励因子,这是因为这种激励因子同时也是受到难度级别选择的激励。作为玩家而不是开发者的我们现在能够决定如何适应游戏中的挑战,这也能够将我们进一步带到游戏中。

这种自我评估是发生在游戏前。我们需要判断自己是否足够硬核?是否属于休闲玩家?在这一领域属于哪个立基群体?随着我们在游戏中的不断前进,这样的问题也会反复出现。这里始终都会呈现出各种选择,所以这便是一种自我反思的状态。

“改善”激励因子

处于对立面的改善激励因子是以进程和技能为基础。

经历这种动机的玩家将作出这样的评价:“我已经识别出这种攻击模式”或“如果有更多钱的话我便能够得到更厉害的盔甲去对抗boss”或“
所以这次我选择潜伏在他周围并将剑插进他的内脏将其消灭掉。”

你经常会在基于技能和记忆的游戏或者带有RPG元素的游戏中看到这种激励因子。特别是现在,这两者更是进一步融合在一起。这些动机工具瞄准了我们心理元素中的复杂部分,包括我们如何衡量风险和不确定性,如何解决谜题以及如何在长期目标中衡量短期收获。

FlightSchoolImprovement(from gamasutra)

FlightSchoolImprovement(from gamasutra)

长话短说,概念激励因子能够让我们基于复杂的方式进行更多的思考。就像剑士需要经历几年的训练才能真正精通剑术一样,改善激励因子也是通过重复,技能和属性改善而提供给我们同等的电子游戏体验。

相对于自我激励因子,这种类型的激励因子具有一定的内在优势,让我们着眼于一些使用了“改善”的游戏例子。

关于挑战的一些典例

你可能听过有人说一款游戏并不复杂但却具有挑战性。尽管这是语义的问题,它却揭示了一些游戏激励因子的内涵。

自我激励因子倾向于让玩家做出反应并将游戏变成是更加静态化的体验。比起提升难度去应对挑战,玩家将只会喃喃道自己能够做到,如果出现更糟糕的情况,他们只会选择降低难度级别。这也许能够明确玩家当前对自己以及愿望的看法,但这却不能带给他们挑战并将其引至自我改善的阶段。

以下是一些相关游戏例子。

《血源诅咒》

我曾一度好奇为什么From Software的游戏会如此受欢迎。人们说《Souls》系列和《血源诅咒》非常复杂但也很直接,这是因为它使用了改善激励因子。

《血源诅咒》中经常出现的场景是:你死掉了并失去了所有的进程。这听起来真的很糟糕。但你要想想,至少我发现了一些捷径并清楚如果射中敌人的内脏,这便是致命的一击。

所以你能够使用这一的智慧快速回到游戏中并抄捷径去延伸你的进程。但如果失败了,你便可以通过提高属性或购买更厉害的装备去获得优势。

这些都说明改善激励因子在发挥作用。它们并不会提供给你难度级别选择,但它们会提供给你其它选择。这是关键。这里的选择是关于更复杂的内容(多条改善路径),这取决于开发者创造出让玩家能够以更具创造性的方式获得优势的系统。

这样的挑战是From Software游戏的核心,这意味着他们是围绕着这样的框架去创造游戏—-这需要计划与紧密的测试。这同时也能够促进玩家的反应,也就是更深层次的满足感。这能够呈现出玩家的自我形象,并让我们能够变成更棒的人。

《合金装备:原爆点》

所以你没玩过RPG以及最近基于RPG的一些游戏?没事,因为还有许多基于技能的游戏体验能够让我们以各种方式去处理问题,而难度的存在与方法一样多变。

我敢打赌有人在尝试了《合金装备:原爆点》后会说“我害怕潜行”,然后便退出了游戏。为什么?这是我们猜到的事。我便是这样的人,即玩过之前的《合金装备》游戏并只是想要在经历了4个小时的爬行后掏出一把枪射杀眼前的所有人。

在这方面上《合金装备》真的很酷。但更吸引人的是什么?它让潜行变得非常有趣让你会更喜欢它。这是我第一次欣然俯身爬行,击退一个又一个可怜的守卫,并拉出双筒望远镜去标记任何移动的事物。

原因很简单:它会给予任何风格的游戏别出心裁的奖励。潜行将获得武器,弹药和对话奖励。而炮轰将获得纯粹的欢笑奖励。不管怎样你都能够获得可开启的额外任务奖励以及背景故事卡式磁带去填补更多角色和背景。

尽管《合金装备:原爆点》拥有可选择的难度级别,它却几乎不需要它们(游戏邦注:直到你完成基本模式后才能看到复杂模式)。这也是Kojima所创造的游戏的优势—-纯粹的挑战需要玩家不断改善自己,并始终以让人惊讶的方式去奖励玩家的这种改善。

改善的结果

所以问题是,这对我们来说意味着什么?

首先,它并不意味着:可选择的难度级别是好的。自从1981年《Tempest》发行以来它们便存在着,并且是作为一种必要的功能。换句话说,它们将提供给人们反复回到游戏中的借口。我理解开发者拥有有限资源这一事实,有时候有将一个可选择的难度级别整合到游戏中是一种实现目标的明确且快速方式。

生活就像一条漫长且崎岖的道路,我不会责怪那些选择最短路径的人(也许我也做了同样的选择),但是我认为当我们这么做的时候其实也失去了一些东西。

毫无疑问,改善的道路非常艰难。它需要开发者事先规划挑战以及通向成功的多条道路,并通过开发不断重新做出评估。

但是改善的结果总是会变得更好,因为它击中了克服困境的核心。它让游戏成为玩家感受到胜利以及灵魂上的满足感的垫脚石。

比起只是表现出我们的偏见,它能够改变它们,这真的非常厉害。作为开发者的我们有机会根据玩家去创造挑战,并推动着他们去改善自己。

因为除了提供给他们轻松,中等或复杂等选择外,我们可以提供给他们一些更棒的选择—-即让他们能够按照自己的想法前进的选择。

这也是生活的真谛所在:通过一次又一次的试验让自己不断变得更好。

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

Motivate Me: Crafting Better Game Difficulties

by Taylor Bair

I snapped. Guys with armored vests kept blowing holes in me with shotguns; snipers with floating red dot sights scattered my precious cranium meat on the stones; that Aztecan death music looped endlessly in my addled brain, and I just snapped. I opened the Uncharted 3 menu, scrolled down to difficulty selection, and did the unthinkable.

I took a deep breath and clicked “Very Easy.”

It troubled me then and it troubles me now, but for very different reasons.

You see, this isn’t just a question of video game difficulty levels – if they’re superfluous or essential. It’s a question of motivation – both from a developer and gamer standpoint. It’s about what motivates us to play games, and ultimately, it’s about what motivates us psychologically – in relationships, in decision making, in life.

Uncharted

The traditional model of difficulty selection communicates and triggers something in the mind of a gamer, and that has harmful effects not just for the player, but for game design. So in looking through this issue for a development of my own, I stumbled upon some far reaching implications for game designers and gamers that could change the way we not only create games, but enjoy them.

It all comes back to motivation – our desires for the future, beliefs about ourselves, and the very meaning of improvement. So we turn first to the traditional system of difficulty selection and what it says about us.

The Road Most Traveled

Game developers are plagued with a host of fears. Most hide below the surface, bubbling up at night while we lie in bed after a particularly long, stressful day. Because our lives are variable, we want guarantees. And the greatest guarantee we can get? That our game can be all things to all people.

But we can’t all be GTA V, so devs must get a little creative. We understand that some gamers want a solid story, some want a bone-crushing challenge, and some just want whatever we’re giving them.

Hence difficulty selection was born. A series of modifiers, relatively easy to implement, that can be changed at the push of a button. Everyone wins.

Or maybe we all lose.

The reason why lies in understanding player motivation.

The Heart of Player Motivation

What is a man? Well, if you’re Dracula, we’re miserable little piles of secrets. But I’m not Dracula (so put away the stakes); I’m just a miserable little pile of desires.

That’s why when I approach a video game, I want something. Enjoyment? Sure. Entertainment? Almost certainly. A time sink? Likely.

But we’d be mistaken to think that’s all we want. We want riches, titillation, companionship, jokes, explosions, tears, escapism, and a miserable pile of other things.

And at the heart of these desires lies motivation – the impulse that keeps us chugging along. It feeds us a constant supply of desires and desire fulfillments when done correctly, and we stop playing when done poorly.

The key to all this is simple: we’re motivated in different ways, and those motivators affect our response to challenges. Psychologists have subdivided motivations into core categories (see here and here for more on that if interested), and two categories are of particular interest to us:

“Nature-of-Self” Motivators

This motivation stems from our perception of self, and you can see it at work when the player justifies decisions with phrases like, “Well, I only really care about the story” or “I don’t have time to screw with these stupid shotgunners rushing at me” or “You know, I’d like this game way better if I had more patience.” And it usually leads to a person turning the difficulty level down.

The person who turns the difficulty up? Similar concept. They say, “I like a good challenge” or, “I’m a rabid completionist” or, “That platinum trophy is calling my name.”

The common thread in all these statements: they are about us, not the game. The player is central. We have to know ourselves or form opinions about ourselves to make them.

You often find this motivator in any game with difficulty level selection, and that’s because this type of motivator is actually encouraged by including a difficulty level selection. We as the player, and not the developer, are now responsible for deciding how we fit into the game’s challenge, which turns us internally.

This self-evaluation takes place before we even begin a game. We’re asked to decide – am I hardcore enough? Am I casual? What niche do I occupy in this space? – and that question constantly recurs as we struggle through the game. The choice is always present, and so is the self-reflection.

“Improvement” Motivators

Operating on the opposite end of the spectrum, improvement motivators are progress and skill based.

Players experiencing this sort of motivator will make comments like, “I’ve got to figure out this attack pattern,” or “With a bit more money I can get better armor for that boss,” or “So this time I snuck around him and put a sword in his gut and took him out.”

You often see this motivator in skill and memory based games (and so much of skill is just muscle and pattern memory) or games with RPG elements. Especially now, the two are bleeding into each other. These motivation tools target complex parts of our psyches, including how we weigh risks and uncertainties, work through puzzles, and how we measure short-term gains in the interest of long-term goals.

Long story short, improvement motivators make us think more, and in complex ways. Just as a sword fighter has to gain years of experience to be truly proficient, improvement motivators target repetition, skill, and stat improvement to give us the video game equivalent of experience.

And there are inherent advantages of this kind of motivator over the nature-of-self variety, which we will consider by looking at a few games that utilize them.

Shining Examples of Challenge

You may have heard people say a certain game isn’t difficult, but challenging. While largely a matter of semantics, it reveals something inherent about which motivators a game targets.

Nature-of-self motivators (and having selectable difficulty levels by extension) tend to make players reactive and games more static experiences. Instead of rising to meet a challenge, players will have the nagging feeling that they could, if worse comes to it, just bump the difficulty level down. This may self-validate the player’s current view of themselves and their desires, but it doesn’t challenge them in a way that will actually lead to self-improvement.

Here are some games that do, however, and the means by which they manage it.

Bloodborne (Souls Series)

Ever wonder why From Software’s games are so popular? People say the Souls series and Bloodborne are incredibly difficult but fair, and that’s largely because it uses improvement motivators.

A common scenario in Bloodborne runs like this: you die and lose all your progress. It’s sorta terrible, really. But hey, you think, at least I opened a shortcut and learned if I shoot this enemy in the gut, it’s a one-hit kill.

So you run back through, hopefully using that wisdom and that shortcut to further your progress. But if that fails, you can always gain an advantage by improving stats or buying better equipment.

These are both improvement motivators at work. They don’t give you an option of selecting a difficulty level, but they do give you an option. And that’s key. The option here is more complex – multiple paths of improvement – and it depends on the developer creating systems that allow players to gain the advantage in creative ways.

That challenge is at the heart of From Software’s games, which means they create their games around that framework – planning and intense testing are required. But it also fosters a better player response – namely, deep satisfaction. It actually informs self-image rather than draws from it, which quite literally makes us better people.

Metal Gear Solid: Ground Zeroes

So you’re not into RPGs and the stat-boosting craze of recent RPG-inspired games? No problem, because there are still skill-based experiences out there that allow us to approach things in multiple ways, the difficulty as variable as the approaches.

I dare someone to try MGS:GZ, say, “I’m terrible at stealth,” and quit. Why? Because it kind of expects that. I’m that guy, the one who plays previous MGS games and just wants to pull out a gun after 4 hours of crawling like an idiot on my belly and mow every person down in sight.

And MGS:GZ is totally cool with that. But more fascinating? It makes stealth so damn fun that you’ll probably prefer it. For the first time I gladly crawled on my belly, pumped round after round of knockout darts into hapless guards, and pulled out binoculars to mark everything that moved.

The reason is simple: it has such inventive rewards for every style of play. Stealth is rewarded with bonus weapons, ammo, and conversations. But run and gun is rewarded with sheer volume of hilarious. Rocket a guard in the face, close-quarters-combat a poor bloke into submission, or set intricate C4 charges in a line and lure everyone into your wall of flame. Either way, you’ll get unlockable bonus missions and backstory cassette tapes to fill out even more of the characters and setting.

And while MGS:GZ has selectable difficulty levels, it hardly needs them (and the hard mode is blocked anyway until you complete it on normal). That speaks to the strength of the game Kojima has crafted – pure challenge that requires players to improve, always rewarding that improvement in spectacular ways.

The End of Improvement

So the question then becomes, what does this mean for us?

First, what it does not mean: selectable difficulty levels are not bad. They have existed, arguably, since Tempest released in 1981, and they serve a necessary function. Namely, they give people an excuse to come back for more and developers one less thing to focus on. I understand that developers have limited resources, and sometimes tossing a selectable difficulty level into the mix is the clearest, quickest way of achieving a goal.

Life is full of long, arduous roads, and I wouldn’t hold it against someone for taking the path of least resistance (God knows I’ve done the same), but I do think we rob ourselves of something when we do.

Make no mistake, the path of improvement is tough. It requires developers plan challenges and multiple paths to success ahead of time, and constantly re-evaluate throughout development.

But the end of improvement is always better, because it strikes at the heart of overcoming adversity. It makes the game a stepping-stone to moments of euphoric air punches, of howls of victory, of deep, soul-satisfying joy.

Instead of just reflecting our preconceptions, it changes them, and that’s powerful. We as developers have a chance to make challenges that scale as players scale, pushing them to improve – yes, even those who play on easy.

Because if we don’t give them the choice of easy, medium, or hard, we give them a greater choice – the choice to rise to the occasion their own way.

And that’s what life is really about: making us better, one trial at a time.(source:gamasutra)

 


上一篇:

下一篇: