游戏设计中“少即是多”究竟是什么含义

原作者：Alessandro Pintus 译者：Willow Wu

你是一个讲故事的人，或者是一个玩具制造商，又或者你二者都是。在做游戏时，你必须要有明确的目标：比如，讲述一个具有冲击力的故事、做一个令人沉浸的游戏、通过一种有趣好玩的方法实现教学。当你有了目标和主题，之后设计的每一个方面都必须要对游戏的核心架构起到正面强化作用。总会有一个时候，你要问自己“故事需要这个东西吗？”“这样做能够让主题和剧情变得更加清晰吗？”“这个机制是有助于我实现目标还是偏离了轨道？”

删掉多余的部分究竟是什么意思？

要回答这个问题，我们先来做一个简单的练习：分析成功的游戏，比如篮球、国际象棋，然后问问你自己：

-目标是什么，玩家/球员的动机是什么？

-它们是如何强化机制的？

-你能不能增添什么东西，让它成为更好玩的游戏？（注意只是“增加”，不能“改变”）

-有没有需要删减的地方？

你很快就会意识到这些经典的游戏设计得非常严密，哪怕是改动其中的一小部分，都可能变成一个非常不一样的游戏。可能会变成一个节奏更快、更有意思的游戏，或者更有吸引力，但是这已经是一个不一样的游戏了。创作者原来设定的目标你就无法达到了。

Alliance: Heroes of the Spire（from pocketgamer.biz）

实例研究：篮球

为了解释得更加清楚，让我们分析一个深受世界人民喜爱的成功游戏：篮球。我们一步一步来，先回答最开始的两个问题。（我不是篮球meta内容方面的专家，对于哪些地方可以增添哪些地方需要删减，应该还有更合适的人能给出更好的意见，所以我们就不讲最后两个问题了）

目标是什么，玩家/球员的动机是什么？

在篮球比赛中，你的目标就是把球投进篮筐内得分，最终目标是在比赛结束是拿到比对手更多的分数。

有些玩家的动力可能来源于挑战、竞技、社交娱乐或释放压力（不考虑名利方面的原因）。

-它们是如何强化机制的？

如果有跟朋友打过篮球（其它体育比赛同理），你就会知道自己之后还会回来继续玩，因为比赛本身就有趣，而且你也玩得开心。比赛必须是公平的，这样才能保障乐趣，这也是竞技的核心之一。为了进一步说明，我们来举几个例子：

-按规则，球员应该只能用双手来运球，如果一个球员在移动时没有运球，而是一直抱着，这样就不公平了。因为这意味着在达到篮下之前，别的队伍都没有机会夺走你的球。像橄榄球这样身体接触频繁、有足够大场地的运动，身体对抗是比赛和挑战的一部分。而在篮球中，球员之间的身体对抗是可能导致犯规的。因此球员必须持续运球，只有在停顿、传球或者投球的时候才可以拿着。这种要求持续运球的机制防止了过度控球，给对方一个可以抢夺球的公平机会，而且不会有太多的身体接触，同时防止拖延时间，创造了更为精彩的比赛。
-领先的队伍可能会通过浪费时间来确保胜利运球机制带动比赛进行，但一个跑来跑去的球员可能会在传球上浪费很多时间，从不冒风险自己出手。24秒规则——从一方拿到球开始计算，本队球员必须在24秒内投篮，出手后24秒会重置。比赛中是有一定浪费时间的余地，但24秒规则确保球队必须冒险把球交到在对手手中，通过保持运球避免故意拖延，同时也维护了比赛的公平和乐趣。

篮球的规则能起到很好的限制作用，目标也非常明确。当然，电子游戏本质上会复杂很多，但请不要把这个当成随意设定规则的借口。保持简洁，删去多余的，分析你的设计问题，找一个简单巧妙的对策。

篮球的规则还可以更复杂一些，但是这样会更好吗？也许吧。

又或者，它会变得更加混乱、目标不明确。

严密的设计：《战神》解析

让我们来举一个电子游戏的例子：《战神》（2018）。根据我对游戏的理解，它所呈现的主题是奎托斯在战神残忍本性与情感丰富的人性之间徘徊。一个战士，抛弃了嗜血的生活，试图独自抚养一个半神儿子阿特柔斯——他也在神性与人性之间挣扎。游戏的目的是让你感觉到自己是一个强大战神，关注儿子的成长，慢慢了解他同时也重新认识自己。

《战神》本质上就是一个关于战斗的游戏，所以设计师必须时刻记住得用一些对战机制来强化主题。这并没有那么难，在游戏中你会感觉到主角的超强实力、buff——各种杀伤力满满的招式，游戏也会给出冲击力十足的效果反馈。其它系统都能帮助加强战斗。

《战神》的三个主要系统是对战、探索和角色个性化发展（通过技能树和矮人商店）。所有系统相互作用，在这种情况下，玩家无论是跟哪个系统交互，都能获得更好的体验。让我来解释一下。

就拿探索系统来说吧，它的存在意义就是让玩家收集银片、文物、各种有助于对战的道具。去探索是因为你想得到更好的装备（需要银片）和让奎托斯在战斗中变得更加强大（需要上面说到的道具）。探索过程中往往会遇到战斗，这时你就可以测试一下你新发现的强化道具。

角色个性化不是单纯的审美选择，你可以得到新的动作招式，考虑升级力量、防御或甚至运气，这样你就可以在探索时发现更多东西。

战斗不需要对其它辅助系统起到强化作用，因为它就是设计的核心，但这并不意味着战斗系统就可以完全独立，它还是会配合其它系统，因为你可以通过战斗获得更多的经验和银片，从而去做更多的事。

你能砍掉《战神》的某些设计吗？或许吧。但游戏的设计环环相扣，你没办法通过删除什么东西来获得更多好处，甚至可能会以某种意想不到方式破坏游戏设计。

那能增加更多机制吗？当然可以，但是再说一次，游戏的设计已经很严密了，你必须认真思考新的机制要怎么跟已有的基础系统相互作用，最后会不会破坏哪个地方的平衡。就比如说一个新的武器，可能玩起来很过瘾，但是玩家之前为其它武器所付出的努力是不是就没有价值了呢？

你得问问自己：

这个机制有凸显我的主题吗？

这个机制是否能跟游戏的主要系统产生有意义的关联？

我需要这个机制来更好地实现目标吗？

少即是多

我们在说这个法则时，不是想要单纯地砍掉某些东西，而是要剔除那些无法帮助我们达成设计目标的内容。要注意那些会阻碍玩家理解游戏、无法让他们获得你预期中游戏体验的机制。

就把你的设计想象成一个用大理石方块雕刻出来的球体，有一些粗糙的边缘，你希望观众看到的是一个完美的球体，所以你要打磨这些边缘，成为一个更圆润的球体。

本文由游戏邦编译，转载请注明来源，或咨询微信zhengjintiao

You are a storyteller, a toy-maker, or both. When making a game you have to make clear goals: it could be telling an impactful story, making an engaging game, teaching a subject in a fun and interesting way. When you have a goal and a theme, every aspect of your design must reinforce those pillars; there comes a point in designing where you have to ask yourself “Does the story need this?” “Does this help to make the theme and story clear?” “Does this mechanic reinforce my goal or detract from it?”.

What does it mean to get rid of the excess?

To answer this question, here’s a simple exercise: analyze successful games, something like basketball or chess, and ask yourself:

-What are the goals and player motives?
-How are the mechanics strengthened by them?
-What can you add to make it a better game? (Add not change)
-Is there some fat to trim?

You will quickly realize that old and successful games are very tightly designed and changing even a small part of it could lead you to a very different game. It could result in a quicker, more fun game or a more engaging game but a different one at that. You would fail the design goals set by the creator.

Case study: Basketball

To make it clear, let’s analyze a popular and successful game: Basketball. Let’s go step by step and answer the first two questions you have to ask yourself. (I’m no expert in Basketball’s meta and there are far better-suited people to go over what to add and what to trim, so we’ll skip the last ones)

What are the goals and player motives?

In the game of Basketball, the objective is to get the ball inside the hoop to score points; the goal is to get at the end of the match with a higher score than the opposing team.

Some player motives may be (excluding fame and monetary reasons) the challenge, the rivalry, social recreation or blowing off steam.

How are the mechanics strengthened by them?

If you play or have played basketball with your friends (same as any other sports game) you know that you come back to play it because it’s fun and you have fun. The game needs to be fair to safeguard fun and it’s an integral part of competitiveness. To clarify even further, let’s go through a couple of examples:

-Players are expected to exclusively use their hands to manipulate the ball; it could get unfair if, when a player gets the ball, they could hug it while moving, because possession of the ball could mean arriving at the hoop without giving the other team a chance to recoup the ball. In a high contact sport like football, with a big enough field, it’s a part of the game and challenge; in Basketball high contact between players would result in a foul. Players are therefore required to bounce the ball and stop only when coming to a halt, passing the ball, or shooting for the hoop. This mechanic of continuously bouncing prevents an over possession of the ball, gives a fair chance to the other team to snatch the ball without much contact while at the same time prevents the game from stalling, creating a more interesting match.
-A winning team could waste time to ensure its victory. We have the bouncing mechanic to keep the flow of the game, but a running player could waste a lot of time just passing the ball and never risking a move. Enter the 24 seconds rule: a team must shoot within 24 seconds from gaining possession of the ball, the timer resets with every shoot. There’s still room to waste time but this rule ensures that the teams must risk throwing the ball in the hands of the opponents, preventing stalls by keeping the ball moving, safeguarding fairness and fun as well.

The ruleset of Basketball is limited and with a crystal clear goal. Of course, a video-game is much more complex by nature, but don’t use it as an excuse to get lazy with your ruleset. Keep it simple, trim the excess, find elegant solutions for your design problems.

Basketball could have a bigger set of rules, could it be better? Maybe.

Or maybe it would be just messy and unclear.

Tight design: God of War

Let’s take a video-game as another example: God of War (2018). By my understanding of the game, the theme is Kratos being torn between his harsh nature of god (of war) and his softer human side. A warrior, past his bloodthirsty days, alone, trying to raise a demigod son, who is physically torn between his god and human side. The objective of the game is to make you feel like a powerful god of war and make you care for your son, understand him and Kratos himself.

GoW is essentially a game about fighting, so the designer has to keep in mind that he has to use fighting mechanics to reinforce the theme. It’s not that hard, the game makes you feel super strong and buff with powerful moves and feedbacks. Every other system helps strengthen the fighting.

The three main systems are fighting, exploration, and character personalization (via skill trees and the dwarfs’ stores). Every system interacts with the other to give the player a better experience with each one. Let me explain.

Take for example exploration, its purpose in GoW is finding items that can range from silver coins to artifacts, to battle enhancing tools. You want to explore because you want better gear (for which you need silver coins) and a more powerful Kratos in battle (with the aforementioned enhancing tools). Exploration often leads you to battles where you can test your newfound powers.

Character personalization is not only a mere aesthetic set of choices, but you can also get new moves, choose between strength, defense or even luck upgrades to find more stuff when exploring.

Fighting doesn’t need to reinforce the secondary systems because it’s the central part of the design but even this system interacts with the others because fighting gets you more experience and silver coins.

Could you trim something from this design? Probably. But the design is so tight that you can’t get a lot more from it by trimming the excess. You could even hurt the design in unsuspected ways.
Could you add more mechanics? Again, sure, but with an already tight design, you have to think about how the new mechanics interact with the base systems and whether you could end up with a loss of balance somewhere. A new weapon, for example, could be very fun to play but undermine the efforts made with the other existing weapons.

You have to ask yourself:

Does this mechanic enhance my themes?

Does this mechanic interact with the main systems in a meaningful way?

Does my design need this mechanic to better reach its objectives?

Less is more

What we mean when we say it, is not to get rid of something just because, it’s to get rid of what disrupts the reaching of the design objectives.

You have to look out for mechanics that impede the player from getting your game, what you mean, what you want him to experience.

Think about your design as a sphere carved out of a cube of marble with a few rough edges; you want the spectator to see a perfect sphere so trim those edges and make it less to have (a) more rounded sphere.

(source: gamasutra.com )