作者：Kathleen De Vere

我们正位于旧金山设计中心，播报Inside Network的第3届年度Inside Social Apps大会。

今天的第2个讨论会主题是“社交游戏的趋势”。讨论会主持人是AJ Glasser，参与者有Loot Drop首席运营官和游戏设计师Brenda Garno Brathwaite、Zynga Dallas的创意总监Bill Jackson、Gaia Interactive首席执行官Mike Sego以及King.com联合创始人和首席创意官Sebastian Knutsson。以下是此次讨论的内容。

Who Are The Social Gamers

AJ：我想跟大家聊聊社交游戏的发展。它们是否会重走传统游戏之路呢？

Bill：对我来说，这两类游戏的发展之路是相同的连续统一体。Atari、任天堂和PC此前都吸引了大量的客户。就我的个人看法，我的任务是让产品的客户量日渐增多，并让他们腾出时间来玩游戏。

Mike：我认为，社交游戏的发展之路显得很有趣，与主机游戏的发展大为不同。游戏发展的重心不应放在制作更好的图像上，我觉得社交和手机游戏发展的重心是扩展用户和开拓新玩家。我觉得，这片领域里有供更多类型游戏发展的广阔空间。3个开发者在车库中就可能创作出社交和手机游戏新产品，发明新题材游戏。

Brenda：我看到的趋势是，社交领域的发展之路与传统游戏行业相同。传统游戏行业变得极为题材化，社交游戏空间也正朝这个方向发展。我们正在培养的行业文化是，快速复制已有产品，缺乏创新意识。

AJ：King.com极擅长于以《泡泡怪》和《泡泡龙》等老游戏为基础通过创新制作全新的游戏。能否分享下你们的开发过程？

Sebastian：我们的关注点在于，留住我们的核心用户群体，制作容易上手和体验的游戏。尽管玩家们正提出更好图像的需求，但社交游戏的优势仍是社交性。人们希望能够同好友一起玩游戏。

AJ：你觉得将来好友在社交游戏中有何用处？只是增加游戏分数排行榜上的人数吗？

Sebastian：我觉得关注点应放在协作性游戏上，让人们同其他玩家产生联系，而不只是他们的好友。

Brenda：我觉得，现在同好友一起玩游戏只是项行贿功能。在我正在制作的游戏中，我特意避免这种情况的出现。我想要确保的是，好友功能能够成为休闲和硬核玩家游戏过程中自然的一部分。这可能是设计中最重要的功能之一。

AJ：我们看到的趋势之一是战斗，你觉得即时竞争玩法会在社交游戏领域产生何种影响力？

Bill：我觉得这只是个工具，在设计游戏时需要恰当地使用。我觉得，社交游戏存在同步游戏的可能。到目前为止，我们还未看到这种类型的市场巨作，但我认为这是可以实现的。我很关注异步玩法的扩展，因为我觉得这是个可以创新社交游戏的空间。

Mike：我觉得，Facebook和网页是非常成功的异步平台。在这个平台上，我可以更新3个小时之前做过的事情，获得之前动作的反馈。我认为，《Words With Friends》的成功原因在于其符合Facebook用户使用平台的习惯。也就是说，在Facebook上玩游戏的人非常多，而且人们对异步战斗游戏很感兴趣。Facebook同其他平台之间确实属于竞争关系，当你玩Facebook游戏时就不会玩其他平台的游戏。如果同步玩法要想获得成功，就需要出现能够吸引不想玩即时战斗游戏的玩家，即便这些玩家不属于那种花两个小时玩主机游戏的类型。

AJ：提及发展不同社交游戏题材，你认为哪块新领域能够吸引用户？

Brenda：我将Facebook视为整个社交游戏领域的一部分。我的游戏或许会投放到Facebook、iOS和PC等多个平台，但它们需要配合才能使盈利最大化。如果游戏很有趣，那么你就能赚到钱。如果你只是在游戏中耍小聪明，那么你会毁了整个游戏。我玩的时间最长的社交游戏是《Minecraft》。这款游戏并没有营销预算，但却是款很棒的社交游戏，我很愿意向这群人支付金钱。

Bill：作为游戏开发者，我认为趣味性是你需要追求的目标，但不是全部。比如，有些玩家时间有限，你需要给予玩家与好友保持联系的方式。这意味着人们会渴望获得加速之类的道具，但趣味性依然是核心。

Brenda：你可以从游戏中获得乐趣或支付金钱更快地获得乐趣。

Mike：我认为，能够盈利的是为用户创造情感体验的产品。现在，可以在Facebook上获得盈利的方式很多。去年Facebook上排名前三的游戏是《CityVille》、《FarmVille》和扑克游戏，其他游戏也跟随它们的步伐，开发商竞相制作同类游戏。现在，可盈利游戏类型变得更加丰富，通过各种不同的方式和从不同的受众身上获得盈利。

AJ：当你在测试游戏时，你如何知道游戏是否带有趣味性？

Bill：我的方法是将设计和指标结合起来。当我们设计游戏时，我们从设计开始，随后同玩家协作来提升游戏。结合反馈和支持反馈的数据，根据这些反馈来设计。

Sebastian：我们发现，真正的趣味性问题是难度曲线。如果游戏太简单，玩家就不会重返游戏，如果游戏太难，会让玩家产生挫败感。用户喜欢的是短期的游戏时间，我们在这方面犯了点错误。

AJ：Bill，在《CastleVille》上线的前两周里，你是否改变或修改了某些东西？

Bill：难度曲线确实会带来问题。在《Castleville》中，我们的平衡和制造确实产生过问题。在这次讨论会中，我们谈论游戏的趣味性，但这些是社交游戏，它们不只是玩家间的对话和交谈，当游戏真正开始变得社交化以及在玩家互动时，趣味性可能会发生改变。以单个玩家的身份参与到游戏中与参与到社区中的感觉有何不同呢？我觉得，当玩家参与到更庞大的社区中时，他们会喜欢上游戏世界及其环境。

Mike：我觉得这又回到了用户反馈的层面上，但这些用户反馈不会只提供给你，用户会相互分享他们对游戏的看法，元社区就此崛起。我认为，如果既有玩家喜欢你的游戏又有玩家讨厌你的游戏，那么就意味着你的游戏产生了情感响应。

Brenda：我不觉得我们对玩家情感的影响已经达到了《魔兽世界》等游戏的程度，在此类游戏中，玩家会为无法登陆游戏而感到懊恼，也会每晚10点依然待在游戏中维护公会。社交游戏还未取得这种成就。

AJ：你们对手机游戏领域有何看法？你们如何将游戏移植到手机平台上？

Sebastian：我们已经专注于保持游戏在各平台上的一致性。我们的游戏都很简单，所以我们可以选择制作跨平台游戏。

Bill：我觉得，这取决于游戏的类型。我也认为，手机是个确立产品地位的重要平台。我们制作的应用也非常流行。

AJ：最后一个问题比较难，Brenda已经同意发表自己的看法。哪些行为会对社交游戏领域产生影响？游戏克隆是否会影响该领域？

Brenda：克隆是个令人厌恶的做法。社交游戏所采用的技术毫无挑战性。你可以注册引擎，外包艺术，两个月内就可以开发出游戏。最关键的就是想法。在Loot Drop工作时，我们曾经面见某发行商和游戏设计师，讨论某个游戏想法。第二周，发行商回来告诉我们他们正在制作这款游戏，可能需要我们提供咨询意见。这款游戏还只是个想法就被克隆了。我在进入社交游戏行业之前从未听说过这种情况。作为游戏开发商，我们需要努力保护我们的游戏。在传统游戏领域里，当我们看到优秀游戏面世时，我们的想法是“我们如何才能以此为基础制作出更好的游戏？”现在，我们的想法是“我们如何来改变叙事，制作出相同的游戏？”这就好比仿造《愤怒的葡萄》出版《愤怒的桃子》。在其他的媒介中，这种做法会被视为彻底的失败。我觉得之所以社交游戏领域会出现这种现象，是因为这片领域的关注点是盈利而不是创造性。我认为这会影响到领域的创新性，因为今后开发商不愿意进入这片领域，或许会选择坚持原本的主机游戏开发。我觉得，这对社交游戏领域来说是很不幸的。进入这片领域的大型公司有足够的资金来打这场克隆战，但小型开发商根本无法做到。

游戏邦注：本文发稿于2012年2月8日，所涉时间、事件和数据均以此为准。（本文为游戏邦/gamerboom.com编译，拒绝任何不保留版权的转载，如需转载请联系：游戏邦）

Liveblogging Inside Social Apps: Trends in Social Gaming

Kathleen De Vere

We’re at the San Francisco Design center, blogging Inside Network’s third annual Inside Social Apps conference.

The second panel of the day is “Trends in Social Gaming”. Joining moderator AJ Glasser on stage is Loot Drop’s COO and game designer Brenda Garno Brathwaite, Zynga Dallas’ creative director Bill Jackson, Gaia Interactive’s CEO Mike Sego and King.com’s co-founder and chief creative officer Sebastian Knutsson. The following is a paraphrased transcript of the discussion.

AJ: I wanted to talk about the evolution of social games. Are they going to mimic the path of traditional games?

Bill: I come from that sector — for me it’s not a separate path, it’s the same path and one continuum. Atari, Nintendo and PCs all brought in larger audiences. I think the mission in my mind is to make the audience larger and make room for play.

Mike: I think the evolution of social games has been in an interesting path. It’s been very different from the evolution of console games. Games that evolve with better graphics are missing the point, I think the point of social and mobile is to expand the audience and bring in new players. I think it there is room for a wider variety of games. Three developers working out of a garage can open up a new segment on social and mobile and invent a new genre of game.

Brenda: I do see a trend that the social space is actually following the development path of the traditional games industry. The traditional games industry got very “genre-fied” and the social game space is following that. We’re getting a culture of fast-follow where we take things and copy it and there’s a lack of innovation.

AJ: King.com has been very good at innovating on older games like Snood and Puzzle Bobble and making it into a totally different game. Can you tell us about your development process?

Sebastian: Our focus as has been to stay with our core demographic and make games that are easy to play and get into. Even though people are asking for more advanced graphics, the strength is social. People want to play with their friends.

AJ: What do you see as the future use of friends in social games? Will it just be leader boards?

Sebastian: I think the focus will be on cooperative and collaborative gaming, allowing people to hook up with other players, not just their friends.

Brenda: I think playing with your friends is just a bribery function right now. In the game I’m working on I very deliberately didn’t want to do that. I wanted to make sure that having it there felt like a natural and intrinsic part of gameplay for both casual and hardcore players. That was probably one of the most important features in the design.

AJ: One of the trends that we’ve seen is combat – what impact do you think real-time competitive play will have on social games?

Bill: I think that’s a tool and the game needs to demand that tool to use it well. I think there’s an opportunity in the space for synchronous play. So far we haven’t had a giant hit but I don’t think there’s a reason there couldn’t be. I’m excited to expand on asynchronous play because I think that’s one space where social games have innovated.

Mike: I think Facebook and the web is very successful as an asynchronous platform. It’s a platform where I can update what I did three hours ago and get feedback on it. I think the success of Words With Friends is based off how well it fits with Facebook’s usage habits. That said there’s a lot of people playing games on Facebook and people are interested in playing synchronous combat games. Facebook does compete with other platforms, and when you play a game on Facebook you’re not playing on another a platform. For synchronous play to be a hit, there needs to be a game were you can bring in players that wouldn’t play a real-time combat game and bring them into that experience, even if they’re not the type to play a game for two hours on a console.

AJ: When we talk about branching out the different genres of social games, where do you see the opportunities to go into new territory and bring in new users?

Brenda: I see Facebook as one part of a whole. My game may be on Facebook, iOS and PC, but it needs to work together for the greatest monetization. If the game is fun you’ll get money. If you have to bribe or use tricks you’ll break the game. The most social game I’ve ever played is Minecraft. That game doesn’t have a marketing budget but it’s a wonderfully social game and I’m happy to give that guy money regularly.

Bill: As a game developer I think that fun is something you need to aspire to, but it’s not everything — for example some players have limited time and you need to give players a way to keep up with their friends if they’re limited on time. That means there are other items like accelerators that people will covet, but fun is the core.

Brenda: You can have fun or pay to have fun faster.

Mike: I think what monetizes is what people feel strongly about — creating an emotional experience. Size is also what monetizes. There’s a much wider variety of what monetizes on Facebook now. If you looked at the top three games last year it was CityVille, FarmVille and maybe poker and the other games were following along those lines and trying to make the same kinds of game. Today there’s a much broader variety of games that can all monetize in different ways and monetize thorough different audiences.

AJ: When you’re testing your games, how do you know when you’ve hit that sweet spot of “fun?”

Bill: I follow a combination of design and metrics. When we’re designing a game we start with design and then you start collaborating with players to improve the game. It’s a combination of feedback, the data that backs up that feedback and working from that feedback.

Sebastian: We find the real issue is hitting the sweet spot in the difficulty curve. If it’s too easy or too hard they won’t come back or they’ll get frustrated. Users tend to prefer shorter playtimes so we err on that side.

AJ: Bill — was there anything that you changed or fixed in the first 14 days of CastleVille being live?

Bill: There’s definitely issues with difficulty curves. In Castleville we had issues with balance and crafting and getting that right. In this discussion we talked about fun, but these are social games and so it’s not just a conversation, but that it will scale when it gets to be truly social and how players will interact together. How is it that you’re engaged as a single player and how are you engaged as a community? I think people will love a game world and the environment when they’re engaged in a larger community.

Mike: I think that goes back to user feedback and that’s not just user feedback that comes to you but that users share with each other and the meta community that springs up. I think if people both love your game and hate your game it means you tapped into an emotional response.

Brenda: I don’t think we’ve tapped into feeling that users get from games like World of Warcraft where you will feel bad if you don’t log in and do something at 10 pm every night because you’ll be letting your guild down. Social games haven’t done that yet.

AJ: How do you feel about mobile? How do you approach bringing a game to mobile?

Sebastian: We’ve focused on keeping the game the same on each platform. Our games are simple and it fits us very well to create cross platform games.

Bill: I also think it depends on the type of game and what’s right for the platform. I do see mobile as a way to keep in touch with a comfort zone of what you’ve established. Our express apps have been very popular.

AJ: My last question is a difficult one that Brenda has agreed to take. What about what could harm the social game space? What about cloning?

Brenda: Cloning is a disgusting subject. The technology isn’t a challenge. You can license an engine and outsource the art and develop a game in two months. What matters now is the idea. Inside of Loot Drop we had a meeting with a publisher and a game designer discussed an idea for a game and the publisher came back next week and said they’d be making the game and they might need us to consult on it. That game had been cloned before a line of code had even been written. I’d never heard the term fast-follow until I came into the social games industry. We as game developers need to be phenomenally protective of our games — in the traditional space, a great game would come out and you would say “how can we make a game that good and improve on that?” What we have now is “how can we change the narrative and make the same game?” That’s like putting out the Peaches of Wrath rather than the Grapes of Wrath. In any other medium it would be considered a tremendous fail and I think its because the space is about monetization and not about creativity. I think that could hurt innovation because developers may not come into this space and may choose to stay in console development. I think its very unfortunate. As we see bigger companies come in, they’ll have money to fight the clone wars that smaller developers may not be able to do. (Source: Inside Social Games)