作者：Will Nations

许多游戏玩家都会为了优化自己的游戏玩法能力而去牺牲本想进行角色扮演的愿望。就像有些玩家在特定区域会为了获得新能力或新角色而使用本来很善良的角色去背叛其他角色或因此而错过某些场景。

这里所存在的一个重要问题是关于叙述游戏玩法的不一致。即游戏的沉浸感遭遇破坏，从而导致玩家不得不去面对一些现实情况。

1.游戏具有难度。

2.你的最大乐趣便是为了克服这些难度去优化角色。

3.选择一种游戏玩法对作为玩家的你更有利，而不是对于角色而言，尽管这种选择总是伴随着一些叙述内容。

该怎么做

任何角色扮演游戏中最重要的一个元素便是玩家所拥有的沉浸感。如果游戏缺少可信度，一致性和激情，那么玩家的游戏体验便会遭到破坏。同样地，当玩家去尝试一款打着拥有强大叙述内容的广告的游戏时，这也暗示着叙述设计师与玩家之间的关系。即玩家愿意投入时间和情感到游戏角色和世界中。反之设计师们需要创造能够让玩家一直沉浸于游戏世界中，并值得他们待在这里的体验。一种理想的情况是，在出现任何外部影响之前，玩家绝不会失去自己作为游戏角色的感受。

为了处理我们所呈现出的问题，我们必须回答一些基本问题：

你是否想要将叙述与游戏玩法相结合，如此玩家在一个区域的决定便能够排除他们在其它区域所面对的选择？

如果你希望玩家能够出于叙述原因去做出叙述决定，并出于游戏玩法原因去做出游戏玩法决定，那么你必须明确一系列全新的设计约束条件。

叙述决定不应该：

影响玩家所面对的游戏机制类型；

影响难度水平；

影响玩家使用装备/能力。

游戏玩法决定不应该：

影响玩家使用角色/环境/装备/能力；

影响情节点的方向（不管大小）。

有关这些原则的例子包括《巫师2：刺客之王》和《暗影狂奔：龙陨）。

The Witcher 2(from icili)

在《巫师2》中，我可以选择两个完全不同的叙述方向，同时我们所遇到的环境/任务也会有所不同，但是我仍会遇到：

1.具有相同多样性/频率的遭遇战和掉落装备。

2.关卡挑战中同样的难度级别。

3.同样的装备质量。

在《暗影狂奔》中，玩家可以基于角色或其能力为自己的角色创造一个特定的知识基础。你可以是一个能够召唤精灵的Shaman，他既了解街头生活也了解上流社会。游戏所呈现给玩家的叙述决定将基于玩家在一开始所做出的叙述决定（而非游戏玩法决定）进行调整并影响玩家能够得到的技能/能力。

例外

说实话，这些约束条件也具有一些注意事项；让一个角色扮演决定去影响游戏机制是非常合理的。让我们举个例子来说吧，假设你要玩《黑暗之魂》并基于角色所使用的机制去执行一个自然的游戏难度分配。在《黑暗之魂》中，你可以以魔术师的形式去体验一种“简单的模式”。投入拥有自动填满的弹药的基于范围的技能比包含更多风险的短距离技能能够让游戏更容易被击败。然而值得注意的是，游戏本身也是非常难被打败的，即使是使用魔术师的角色，所以尽管面对种种障碍，这系列的游戏玩法的相关假设还是有效的。

另外一个注意事项便是当玩家在游戏一开始做出了能够影响他们进入的游戏某些部分或他们能够使用的装备/能力的决定。《星球大战：旧共和国》会基于玩家最初的类别决定而呈现给他们截然不同的内容与技能。在这款游戏中，玩家其实是在玩着不同的游戏，但它们仍拥有同样的机制。此外，这些机制也都是独立的。这并不像在某个游戏攻略中选择成为Jedi并且这会影响着玩家下一次想要成为Smuggler的选择。这种情况中存在两种固有的危险。当玩家看到两个角色都访问了同样的内容，但却都受限于这些最初的角色决定时他们便会感到受挫。如果不同的“路径”能够转变成一条核心路径，那么玩家便可能不愿意面对只支持其中一种类别的叙述决定，并最终导致这种决定变成一种大概的估算。

建议

你是否想要避开这种情况呢？以下建议便能够帮助你保证游戏玩法与叙述决定始终是相互独立的。

建议1：多个联盟或可游戏的角色

在进行叙述设计时确保与角色相关的技能与角色的属性并没有直接联系，相反地它们能够在角色间进行独立转换。这里的目标在于确保玩家能够在为角色选择技能或能力以及在为群组选择成员时维持一种优先的叙述状态和优先的游戏玩法状态。

例子：

与角色相关的技能是基于能够随心转换的武器包。对于特定角色来说这些技能是受到玩家所携带的装备的影响。因为任何角色都能够填补任何战斗角色，而故事决定也是不受游戏玩法决定的影响。不管我想要如何设计自己的角色和团队，叙述互动都是由玩家所控制的。

建议2：故事线分支

这样设计你的游戏:

1可以在所有路径/任务线上找到任何与游戏玩法相关的内容（游戏邦注：不管是来自任务的奖励或在特定分支路径中才有的内容），如此便没有一种任务/一条路径是为了获得这样的内容而设计的。至少让玩家能够获得同样有用的内容，如此任何区别便不会影响到玩家克服障碍的成功率。

2.分支间的关卡设计是特别，但那些路径都拥有较高水平的难度/游戏玩法多样性等等。

3.叙述难度是你所强调的主要区别。

例子：

如果我能够解决一个城镇所面临的问题，那么市长便会给我奖励。农民和商人都需要帮助。我可以选择想要先帮助谁。对于农民，我必须保护她的农作物免受土匪的抢夺。对于商人，我必须找出是谁偷了他的商品。而我选择先帮谁都会影响到之后的分支内容。但不管我怎么做，我都会面对同样有趣的游戏玩法，同样程度的体验，以及来自市场的同样奖励。即使我只能帮助其中的一人，我仍然会遇到所有的这些情况。我的决定还会影响到未来的叙述内容，这也代表着之后的故事/关卡设计会发生转变。

建议3：独有的技能叙述控制

这是关于你的角色能够单独拥有一种属性或能力而让自己能够拥有独立的对话选择。特别是，如果你能够沿着特定的路径去创造角色以及玩家必须让自己拥有特定的对话能力时，玩家变有可能失去自己所渴望看到的结合内容。

确保能够使用超级对话能力的决定是区别于角色的整体能力。因此玩家不需要为了探索一条特殊的叙述路径而放弃自己的愿望，因为他们也想使用具有同样技能子集的特殊战斗能力。我还会建议你们为每个技能子集提供相关方法，从而为对话决定提供具有同等价值的结论。

例子：

我可以基于角色属性对别人进行撒谎，威胁，或控制他们的精神。如果我想参与混战，我便需要更高的Strenth。在其它游戏中，它们可能会设定无效的精神控制以及有效的威胁。同样地，还有一些我想要体验的特定游戏部分只能在与精神控制相关的对话选择中进行。幸好我最终能够进行这些选择。而不管我做出怎样的决定我都拥有威胁或撒谎的选择（同时也能够控制别人的精神），并且我都会完成任务并获得同样类型的奖励。

结论

如果你和我一样会因为叙述与游戏玩法的相互依赖而烦恼，那么你便需要好好理解所有的这些内容。

（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）

Narrative-Gameplay Dissonance

By Will Nations

The Problem

Many gamers have experienced the scenario where they must sacrifice their desire to roleplay in order to optimize their gameplay ability. Maybe you betray a friend with a previously benevolent character or miss out on checking out the scenery in a particular area, all just to get that new ability or character that you know you would like to have for future gameplay.

The key problem here is one of Narrative-Gameplay Dissonance. The immersion of the game is destroyed so that you will confront the realities that…

1.the game has difficulties.

2.it is in your best interest to optimize your character for those difficulties.

3.it may be better for you the player, not you the character, to choose one gameplay option over another despite the fact that it comes with narrative baggage.

What To Do…

One of the most important elements of any role-playing game is the sense of immersion players have. An experience can be poisoned if the game doesn’t have believability, consistency, and intrigue. As such, when a player plays a game that is advertised as having a strong narrative, there is an implied relationship between the narrative designer and the player. The player agrees to invest their time and emotions in the characters and world. In return designers craft an experience that promises to keep them immersed in that world, one worth living in. In the ideal case, the player never loses the sense that they are the character until something external jolts them out of flow。

To deal with the problem we are presented with, we must answer a fundamental question:

Do you want narrative and gameplay choices intertwined such that decisions in one domain preclude a player’s options in the other?

If you would prefer that players make narrative decisions for narrative reasons and gameplay decisions for gameplay reasons, then a new array of design constraints must be established.

Narrative decisions should not…

impact the types of gameplay mechanics the player encounters.

impact the degree of difficulty.

impact the player’s access to equipment and/or abilities.

Gameplay decisions should not…

impact the player’s access to characters/environments/equipment/abilities.

impact the direction of plot points, both minor and major.

Examples of these principles in action include The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings and Shadowrun: Dragonfall.

In the Witcher 2, I can go down two entirely distinct narrative paths, and while the environments/quests I encounter may be different, I will still encounter…

1.the same diversity/frequency of combat encounters and equipment drops.

2.the same level of difficulty in the level(s) challenges.

3.the same quality of equipment.

In Shadowrun, players can outline a particular knowledge base for their character (Gang, Street, Academic, etc.) that is independent of their role or abilities. You can be a spirit-summoning Shaman that knows about both street life and high society. The narrative decisions presented to players are then localized to a narrative decision made at the start rather than on the gameplay decision that affects what skills/abilities they can get.

Exceptions

To be fair, there a few caveats to these constraints; it can be perfectly reasonable for a roleplay decision to affect the game mechanics. One example would be if you wanted to pull a Dark Souls and implement a natural game difficulty assignment based on the mechanics your character exploits. In Dark Souls, you can experience an “easy mode” in the form of playing as a mage. Investing in range-based skills that have auto-refilling ammo fundamentally makes the game easier to beat compared to short-range skills that involve more risk. It is important to note, however, that the game itself is still very difficult to beat, even with a mage-focus, so the premise of the series’ gameplay (“Prepare to Die”) remains in effect despite the handicap.

Another caveat scenario is when the player makes a decision at the very beginning of the game that impacts what portions of the game they can access or which equipment/abilities they can use. Star Wars: The Old Republic has drastically different content and skills available based on your initial class decision. In this case, you are essentially playing a different game, but with similar mechanics. In addition, those mechanics are independent regardless. It is not as if choosing to be a Jedi in one playthrough somehow affects your options as a Smuggler the next go around. There are two dangers inherent in this scenario though. Players may become frustrated if they can reasonably see two roles having access to the same content, but are limited by these initial role decisions. If different “paths” converge into a central path, then players may also dislike facing a narrative decision that clearly favors one class over another in a practical sense, resulting in a decision becoming a mere calculation.

Suggestions

Should you wish to avoid the following scenarios, here are some suggestions for particular cases that might help ensure that your gameplay and narrative decisions remain independent from each other.

Case 1: Multiple Allied or Playable Characters

Conduct your narrative design such that the skills associated with a character are not directly tied to their nature, but instead to some independent element that can be switched between characters. The goal here is to ensure that a player is able to maintain both a preferred narrative state and a preferred gameplay state when selecting skills or abilities for characters and/or selecting team members for their party.

Example:

The skills associated with a character are based on weapon packs that can be swapped at will. The skills for a given character are completely determined by the equipment they carry. Because any character can then fill any combat role, story decisions are kept independent from gameplay decisions. Regardless of how I want to design my character or team, the narrative interaction remains firmly in the player’s control.

Case 2: Branching Storyline

Design your quests such that…

1.gameplay-related artefacts (either awarded by quests or available within a particular branching path) can be found in all paths/questlines so that no quest/path is followed solely for the sake of acquiring the artefact. Or at the very least, allow the player to acquire similarly useful artefacts so that the difference does not affect the player’s success rate of overcoming obstacles.

2.level design is kept unique between branches, but those paths have comparable degrees of difficulty / gameplay diversity / etc.

3.narrative differences are the primary distinctions you emphasize.

Example:

I’ve been promised a reward by the mayor if I can solve the town’s troubles. A farmer and a merchant are both in need of assistance. I can choose which person to help first. With the farmer, I must protect his farm from bandits. With the merchant, I must identify who stole his merchandise. Who I help first will have ramifications later on. No matter what I do, I will encounter equally entertaining gameplay, the same amount of experience, and the same prize from the mayor. Even if I only had to help one of them, I should still be able to meet these conditions. I also have the future narrative impacted by my decision, implying a shift in story and/or level design later on.

Case 3: Exclusive Skill-Based Narrative Manipulation

These would be cases where your character can exclusively invest in a stat or ability that gives them access to unique dialogue choices. In particular, if you can develop your character along particular “paths” of a tree (or some equivalent exclusive choice) and if the player must ultimately devote themselves to a given sub-tree of dialogue abilities, then there is the possibility that the player may lose the exact combination they long for.

Simply ensure that the decision of which super-dialogue-ability can be used is separated from the overall abilities of the character. Therefore, the player doesn’t have to compromise their desire to explore a particular path of the narrative simply because they wish to also use particular combat abilities associated with the same sub-set of skills. I would also suggest providing methods for each sub-tree of skills to grant abilities which eventually bring about the same or equivalently valuable conclusions to dialogue decisions.

Example:

I can lie, intimidate, or mind control people based on my stats. If I wish to fight with melee stuff, then I really need to have high Strength. In other games, that might assume an inefficiency in mind control and an efficiency with intimidation (but I really wanna roleplay as a mind-hacking warrior). Also, there are certain parts of the game I want to experience that can only be done when selecting mind-control-associated dialogue options. Thankfully, I actually do have this option. And even if I had the option of using intimidation or lying where mind control is also available, regardless of my decisions, my quest will be completed and I will receive the same type of rewards (albeit with possibly different narrative consequences due to my method).

Conclusion

If you are like me and you get annoyed when narrative and gameplay start backing each other into corners, then I hope you’ll be able to take advantage of these ideas. Throw in more ideas in the comments below if you have your own. Comments, criticisms, suggestions, all welcome in further discussion. Let me know what you think. Happy designing!（source：gamedev）