本文原作者：Paul Suddaby  译者ciel chen

《铲子骑士》在Kickstarter成功募集到足够的资金后发行上市，并成为这个夏天最受期待的一款独立游戏。这款游戏之所以让人觉得充满希望是有它独特的先决条件的：它致力于用现代设备重现任天堂红白机时代经典——最后呈现给玩家的是一个有着真正8-bit风芯片背景音乐的横版平台动作游戏。

《铲子骑士》在发行后得到高度好评，Yachit Club Games工作室的开发者们成功地激起了老玩家们的怀旧情怀，然而同时对于那些从没有玩过经典游戏的玩家们，它呈现的是一个全新而吸引人的游戏。《铲子骑士》有很多不错的设计内容，在这篇文章中，我们将重点看看值得借鉴的四点重要经验。

一个可以承载游戏并具有凝聚力的主题与风格

《铲子骑士》近乎荒谬地坚持着其核心主题——重现经典NES复古感。一切的体验——从游戏界面的像素画化字体到全是芯片音的背景音乐——都透露着一股复古怀旧感。不仅仅是美学方面，而且很多游戏机制都是直接从老NES游戏中借鉴来的，还有关卡设计都深受当时最流行的横版游戏启发。这款游戏模仿得太真实了，以至于它让人感觉就是一款老游戏，让人甚至人忘记了它是一款新发行的游戏了。

开发人员在Gamasutra上写了一篇有趣的文章，文中详细介绍了“铲子骑士”是如何超越NES的技术限制的。

Shovel Knight（from gamedevelopment.tutsplus.com）

这种主题的一致性是《铲子骑士》之所以能成为如此出色游戏的核心原因。没有人可以抵抗住这样游戏的魅力，因为它的整体感实在太好了——游戏每一部分的体验都让人有一种感觉——感觉那就是开发者为了达到游戏怀旧效果最优化而创作的。尽管《铲子游戏》并不总那么完美，但游戏整体感觉真的很不可思议，因为无论从游戏风格还是审美角度来看，它的风格都是那么的一致。

批评《铲子骑士》有时感觉就像在抱怨画廊里挂画的艺术方向：你大可以不喜欢它，不过那只是因为你不了解它想表达什么主题而已。

我们可以从中明白：一种一致的游戏风格确实可以让游戏让人觉得舒服，有时甚至还能让玩家因此忽略一些游戏的缺点。当游戏的一切让人觉得它有意在追求一种清晰的艺术目标时，玩家就很容易沉浸到游戏中并尽情地享受游戏中的世界。

很明显这不仅在对怀旧游戏进行效仿方面可行，这样的艺术豁免权适用于致力于某种特定主体或风格的任何游戏。能有一个驱动着你游戏开发方方面面清晰的艺术方向会让最后产生的产品让人感到舒服并具有凝聚力，而这对游戏的整体体验有很大的助益。

不用害怕，勇敢地去参考借鉴

《铲子骑士》很好玩——我是说真的，真的很好玩。在游戏里的时时刻刻都是令人愉快的——它严谨的控制性，简单而有趣的战斗模式，以及足够棘手的平台设置都让人着迷。这都是因为《铲子游戏》是横屏动作游戏里最好的热门游戏集成：它的BOSS设计让人联想到《洛克人》，Scrooge McDuck的pogo攻击来自于《唐老鸭历险记》，还有那些在任何一代《恶魔城》怀旧系列游戏中都无可替代的游戏物品系统。

尽管从其他横屏游戏里借鉴了许多内容，《铲子骑士》从没有让人觉得它是什么游戏的衍生物，而是给人以一种是这些游戏机制的自然进化产物的感觉。这是因为主流电子游戏设计永远跟迭代有关，尽管一种类型的游戏以新的名字出现时，这样的游戏大多数都包含了一些新创意，而这些新创意则大多由曾经在过去有所效用的关键游戏机制所支撑的。

要是史高治（Scrooge McDuck）能看到他遗留的下来的深远影响就好了

一个很好的例子就是——一个玩家在大多数的第一人称射击游戏中只能持有两种武器的不成文约定。这是一个在一些流行游戏中有趣游戏玩法限制，因此这个设定也就经常被模仿沿用。只要游戏不是依靠这个借鉴来的机制作为其唯一的游戏娱乐形式，那像这样借鉴这些过去被证实可行的游戏机制这种事就根本不是事儿。

不幸的是，独立游戏群体对于这样的迭代设计常常保持沉默——因为他们很多开发者认为他们的游戏就得要是完全不同并且独特的，或者至少要表现出是一种基于现有游戏类型所创造的新的游戏玩法。而《铲子骑士》的表现则告诉我们，那种所谓的独特并不是游戏成功的必要因素。大多数情况下玩家都不会对游戏的创意来源何处或者游戏原创度多高特别在意——他们更在乎的是这个游戏实际玩起来好不好玩。

只要在成型的游戏中存在一些独特之处，借鉴其他游戏的构思和机制将有助于自己的设计创作。正如《铲子骑士》表现的那样——有时仅仅只是结合了各种游戏的构思合为一个统一的整体就足以创造出全新诱人的产品了。

难度设定也可以很灵活

在电子游戏开发里，为玩家设定的关卡难度一直以来都是一个游戏开发者应该重点考虑的内容。玩家使出十八般武艺来玩游戏，而游戏开发者的任务则是对游戏进行微调，这样它才能够将目标受众最大化地转化为玩家。这通常是比较难做到的，所以各种难度的实践就成了游戏的常态。

《铲子骑士》则巧妙地避开了这种传统式的难度设置，采用了其独特的玩家挑战模式。该游戏没有生命限制或者传统意义上的“游戏结束”；取而代之的是，每个关卡都有一系列的检查点，玩家可以通过这些检查点无限地续命。让这个游戏系统有趣的是——玩家被给于了可以破坏这些检查点的选择。破坏检查点相当于一场赌博：它有可能给玩家一些额外的战利品，但是这之后他们得在没有续命机会的情况下打通关卡剩下的内容。

我猜他一定后悔破坏了这个检查点

不幸的是，这个系统似乎让人感觉有点不合理，因为破坏检查点所获得的奖励基本没有足够多的金额来抵消因重复死亡而丢失的战利品的数量。然而，这个创意在概念层面上的确是有趣的，因为这让玩家在游戏中有了管理游戏难度的自主权——就不像那些单一的关卡难度设定里，玩家不会被锁定在一个特定的挑战等级上挑战整个游戏。那些寻求更大挑战的玩家就可以通过破坏检查点来实现——而且还能因此得到奖励——但是这种对高难度的许诺并不是永久的，它只持续到下个检查点出现为止——这个时候玩家再次可以选择是否要增加挑战难度。

这种玩家驱动下的动态型关卡难度并不常见——尽管《铲子骑士》在这一概念的执行过程中遇到了一些问题，但它的确表明了这是一种值得其他游戏借鉴的系统类型——它允许玩家通过与主题相关的游戏系统调整游戏难度，让他们可以在任何给定的时间内体验他们想要的挑战等级，并且不会有那种通过选项菜单里的难易程度设置带来的作弊感。

Shovel Knight（from gamedevelopment.tutsplus.com）

即使在单机游戏里，游戏平衡也很重要

在《铲子骑士》中，玩家可以获得大量的提升能力的武器和物品——这是大部分冒险游戏的标配。典型的升级从范围新的护甲套装提供的特殊攻击效果，一直到更秘传的东西比如一根钓鱼竿和一种叫做混乱球的东西。从理论上来讲，这些物品应该给游戏玩法增添了多样化内容，因为在任意给定的情况下，玩家能有各种各样的使用工具，并且在某些特定允许的情况下，玩家还可以对某一特定物品进行使用。

不幸的是，这个升级系统在《铲子骑士》中表现并不如意。除了某些需要使用特定物品来获得关卡奖励，游戏初始阶段中并没什么可以激起玩家对这类物品的兴致的。这是因为这类物品在功能性上出入太大了，有些物品几乎在什么情况下都能用，而一些其他物品几乎根本没用。这里罪魁祸首是：混乱球——一颗极具破坏力的飞弹；还有“相盒”——一件让玩家暂时进入无敌状态的物品。

实际上是有很多可以玩的东西。不幸的是，大部分都没什么太大用处。

这两件物品如果被滥用，那游戏的大部分内容都会被简单化了。当这两件物品与增加玩家最大物品数量的护甲结合时，“相盒”可以用来在任意关卡上无效化几乎所有伤害，而“混乱球”则可以在几秒内就把游戏里的BOSS干掉了。玩家用不到这样的组合，并且很多玩家肯定不会这样玩，所以游戏并没有完全给毁了，但这也引出了一个问题:为什么在游戏存在作弊的可能性。

很多单机游戏专注于尽可能多地给玩家赋能，却没能同时做到像多人在线游戏那样去真正地考虑游戏的平衡性。然而，通过《铲子骑士》的例子我们可以知道这种专注赋能玩家的思考并不总是正确的。除非有什么是你确切需要的，否则一定要确保你的整个游戏系统没有任何选项内容可以让玩家把你创造的其他内容变琐碎、变没用——这才是正确合适的做法。

相似地，确保游戏中没有任何明显无用的内容也非常重要。如果你想让游戏也能进行多种游戏模式，就要确保这些道具之间的作用效果水平要尽可能平衡。过度赋能或者过弱赋能可以在多玩家模式下被平衡，但是这种游戏类型的考虑在单机游戏开发过程中并不常见。我们不是仅仅因为没有一个多人游戏社区就来抱怨单机游戏的平衡，主要是游戏设计在这方面的缺失是会损害到玩家对游戏的享受的。

总结

《铲子骑士》的很多做法都是正确的，尽管偶尔也会遇到不顺与挫折。尽管从表面上看，它似乎只是一种目的在重现NES旧风貌的奇怪现象，但是实际上，它是包含有很多现代化的思考在内的。从表面上来看并不明显，但是如果你更深入地探究游戏的成功之所在，你会学到很多知识的。

用批思辨性的眼光看一款成功的游戏产品可以一种很有意义的实验，我猜这是我们可以从《铲子骑士》中学到的最后一课。

本文由游戏邦编译，转载注明来源，或咨询微信zhengjintiao

Released after successfully finding funding on Kickstarter, Shovel Knight was one of the most highly anticipated indie games of the summer. The game showed promise because of its unique premise: it aimed to capture the feel of an NES-era classic on a modern device. The result is a level-based action platformer, complete with chiptune music and an authentic 8-bit art style.

Shovel Knight was highly praised upon release, with the developers at Yacht Club Games successfully managing to provoke a feeling of nostalgia in older gamers, while at the same time offering a new and compelling game even for those who never experienced the classics. Shovel Knight does a lot of things right in its design, and in this article we’ll take a look at four important things we can learn from it.

A Cohesive Theme and Style Can Carry Your Game

Shovel Knight has an almost ridiculous adherence to its core theme of recreating the feel of a classic NES game. Everything about the experience, from the title screen’s pixelated font to the entirely chiptune soundtrack, simply oozes retro. This isn’t just an aesthetic thing, many game mechanics are borrowed directly from old NES games, and the level design is heavily inspired by the most popular platformers of the time. The game is so authentic that it really does feel like an old NES game that someone somehow forgot to release.

The developers wrote an interesting article on Gamasutra detailing the ways in which Shovel Knight surpasses the technical limitations of the NES.

This thematic consistency is a core part of why Shovel Knight is such a great game. It’s impossible not to be charmed by the game because it feels so well put together; every part of the experience feels like it’s only there to further the goal of creating a game that is as retro as it can possibly be. Even though Shovel Knight isn’t always perfect, the game as a whole feels inscrutable because of how consistent it is in its style, both from a gameplay and an aesthetic point of view.

Criticizing Shovel Knight can sometimes feel like complaining about the artistic direction of a painting in a gallery: you may not like it, but that’s just because you don’t understand what it’s trying to say.

We can learn from this that a consistent style can really help a game feel well constructed, sometimes even causing players to ignore some of the game’s shortcomings. When everything in a game feels like it’s been deliberately made the way it is in pursuit of a clear artistic goal, it’s easier for players to get immersed in the experience and enjoy themselves.

This obviously isn’t limited to games emulating old systems; this sort of artistic immunity applies to any game committed to a particular theme or style. Having a clear artistic direction that drives every facet of your game’s development can help make the end product feel cohesive and well constructed in a way that significantly benefits the overall experience.

Don’t Be Afraid to Borrow From Others

Shovel Knight is fun to play—and I mean really fun to play. The moment to moment gameplay is consistently enjoyable, with tight controls, simple yet enjoyable combat, and sufficiently tricky platforming. This is because Shovel Knight plays like a greatest hits for action platformers: it’s got boss design reminiscent of Mega Man, Scrooge McDuck’s pogo attack from DuckTales, and items that wouldn’t be out of place in any old-school Castlevania game.

Despite borrowing so much from other platformers, Shovel Knight never feels derivative, and instead feels like the natural evolution of the mechanics seen in the titles it takes from. This is because mainstream video game design has always been an iterative affair, with new titles in a genre often consisting of a few new ideas supported by a set of key mechanics that have worked in the past.

If only Scrooge McDuck could see what his legacy has wrought.

A great example of this is the convention that a player should only be able to hold two weapons in most first person shooters. It’s a fun gameplay constraint that worked in a few popular games, and has thus been adopted by many imitators. As long as a game doesn’t rely on this borrowed mechanic as its only form of entertainment, there’s nothing wrong with doing what has been proven to work in the past.

Unfortunately, there is often a reticence towards this kind of iterative design among the indie community. Many developers feel the need for their games to be entirely unique, or at least present a new gameplay twist on an established genre. Shovel Knight shows us that this isn’t necessary to be successful. Most of the time players don’t particularly care where a game’s ideas came from, or how original they are—they care about how the game actually plays.

As long as there is some uniqueness in the implementation, borrowing ideas and mechanics from other games can be a great tool when creating your own designs. As is evident in Shovel Knight, sometimes something as simple as combining ideas from a few separate games into one unified package can be enough to create something entirely new and engaging.

Difficulty Doesn’t Have to be Set in Stone

The level of challenge a game presents players with has always been an important consideration during video game development. Players come in all skill levels, and developers are tasked with fine-tuning their game’s difficulty so that it will appeal to the maximum number of players possible in their target audience. This is usually very difficult to do, and so the practice of including multiple different difficulty levels has become the norm.

Shovel Knight eschews this tradition in favor of its own unique take on player challenge. The game doesn’t have lives or a traditional game over system; instead, each level has a series of checkpoints that the player can respawn at infinitely. What makes the system interesting is that players are given the option to destroy checkpoints. Destroying a checkpoint is a gamble: it does gives the player some extra loot, but they then have to beat the rest of the level without the use of that particular respawn point.

I bet he regrets breaking the checkpoint

Unfortunately, this system feels inconsequential in practice, since the rewards given for destroying checkpoints are rarely large enough to offset the amount of loot that will be lost by repeatedly dying. However, it’s an interesting idea on a conceptual level, because it lets players govern the difficulty of the game on the fly. Unlike a simple difficulty level setting, players aren’t locked into playing the entire game at a particular level of challenge. Those looking for a greater challenge can destroy checkpoints—and are even rewarded for doing so—but this commitment to a high level of difficulty is not permanent. It only lasts until the next checkpoint is found, at which point players are then given the choice again as to whether or not they want to play with the increased challenge.

This type of dynamic player-driven difficulty level isn’t seen very often. Even though Shovel Knight stumbled a bit in its execution of the concept, it does show that this type of system could be worth pursuing. Allowing players to adjust the difficulty of a game with thematically relevant systems helps pacing by allowing them to experience the level of challenge they want at any given time, without the feeling of cheating one gets by changing a difficulty setting in the options menu.

Balance is Important, Even in Single-Player Games

Throughout Shovel Knight, players are able to acquire a significant arsenal of upgrades and items, as is par for the course in most adventure games. These range from typical upgrades like new suits of armor and special attacks, all the way to more esoteric items like a fishing rod and something called the chaos sphere. In theory, these items should add a lot of variety to the gameplay, giving players multiple tools to use in any given scenario, as well as allowing for scenarios tailored specifically to the use of a particular item.

Unfortunately, this doesn’t quite pan out for Shovel Knight. Other than certain bonus levels that require the use of specific items, there is very little incentive for players to toy around with their arsenal during the game’s primary stages. This is because these items vary wildly in effectiveness, with some being useful in almost every scenario and others bordering on uselessness. The key offenders are the chaos sphere, a highly damaging bouncing projectile, and the phase locket, an item that grants the player temporary invulnerability.

There’s a lot to play around with. Unfortunately, most of it isn’t terribly useful.

If abused, these two items can be used to trivialize most of the content in the game. When coupled with the armor that increases a player’s maximum amount of item uses, the phase locket can be used to avoid almost all damage in any level and the chaos sphere can defeat several of the game’s bosses in a matter of seconds. Players don’t need to use this combination of items, and many surely won’t, so the game isn’t entirely ruined, but it raises the question of why cheating through the game is even possible.

Many single player games focus on empowering the player as much as possible, without really considering balance in the same way multiplayer games do. However, through Shovel Knight’s example, we can see that this isn’t always the right way of thinking. Unless it’s something you explicitly want, it’s always a good idea to go through your game’s systems and make sure there aren’t any options available to the player that allow them to trivialize the content you’ve created.

Likewise, it’s also important to make sure there aren’t any obviously useless inclusions. If you want your game to allow multiple gameplay approaches, make sure they are as equivalent in their effectiveness as possible. Overpowered or underpowered items can be balanced by patches in multiplayer games, but this type of consideration is often not present in development for single player experiences. Just because there isn’t a vocal multiplayer community to complain about a single player game’s balance, doesn’t mean it isn’t an aspect of the design that can seriously harm players’ enjoyment of a title.

Conclusion

Shovel Knight does a lot of things right, even though it does stumble occasionally. Though it might, at face value, appear simply to be an oddity that aims to replicate the old days of the NES, there’s actually a lot of modern considerations baked into its design. This isn’t evident on the surface, but if you take a closer look at why the game succeeded there’s a lot to be learned from it.

Turning a critical eye on a successful product can often be an enriching experiment, and I guess that’s one last lesson we can learn from Shovel Knight.（source：tutsplus.com game development）