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

阐述赌场环境与手机游戏设计的相似原理

发布时间:2012-04-27 15:23:39 Tags:,,,,,

作者:Norman Chan

在Martin Scorsese执导影片《赌城风云》末尾,Robert De Niro所扮演角色为拉斯维加斯的现代商业化感到悲哀,这座城市从浪漫且充满韵味的老维加斯转变成富丽堂皇的度假胜地。但是,尽管De Niro所饰演的Ace Rothstein对赌城转变成旅游胜地嗤之以鼻,实际上这的确是个很不错的生意。正如Jonah Lehrer为《纽约客》编写的简介中所述,现代赌场设计是个非常精明的行业,设计师不仅理解美学吸引力,还掌握赌博人群的心理。

casino_floor(from tested.com)

casino_floor(from tested.com)

Lehrer简介主要探讨的是贝拉吉奥和永利度假胜地背后的设计理念,设计师Roger Thomas违背了之前所有的赌场设计规则,结果反而让赌场赚到更多的金钱。设计师不仅让赌客获得时间概念(游戏邦注:赌场内永远都没有钟表)或者设计迷宫式的平面布置使赌客多次回到赌场所在的楼层,还精心营造愉悦的氛围,减少赌客的压力,塑造“娱乐场地”般的环境。

圭尔夫大学教授Karen Finlay开展了一项测试各种赌场设计的研究:

“数据清晰显示,处于赌场中的赌客都会待更长时间、产生更好的感觉和赌更多的钱。尽管他们离开赌场时损失很大,但他们渴望回到这个地方。”

Finlay注意到这些设计在鼓励赌客花钱方面的效用,赌客被鲜花和精美的家具装饰所迷惑,不断将钱财花在赌场中。根据她的发现,Thomas的设计对那些通常情况下不赌博的顾客会产生特别大的影响。或许,他的布置和装饰的引诱效果在于,它让人感觉此处并不像是个赌场。那种精美带有麻醉效果,让人们忘却损失金钱的疼痛感。

Tiny Tower(from tested.com)

Tiny Tower(from tested.com)

这让我开始思考如何将这种设计心理学运用到数字化赌博机中,也就是基于微交易的手机游戏。《愤怒的小鸟》和《Tiny Tower》很像赌博游戏。它们都充分发掘了我们易受影响的行为特征和倾向。David Caolo剖析《愤怒的小鸟》的行为发掘的文章清楚地表明,这款游戏与传统的斯金纳箱极为相像,提供足够的正强化来确保玩家受到游戏吸引,让玩家往往深陷其中难以自拔。

手机游戏的优势在于,设计师无需花费数千亿建造舒适环境来吸引你玩游戏,你自己会选择舒适和便利的环境,比如在家中或上下班途中。节省下花费在设置环境上的精力,他们可以专注于尽量将他们的赚钱机器变得更像游戏。《Tiny Tower》中可爱的8位图像就等同于贝拉吉奥的花岗石楼梯和大理石雕像。与赌场设计师相似,游戏设计师也不希望你注意到自己的钱包正不断缩水。你不是在丢失金钱,你是在消费。正如拉斯维加斯正慢慢变得更像迪斯尼乐园,我们的手机游戏也正慢慢变得更像赌博机。

好消息是,你可以打败系统,但这并不容易。在赌场中,你不能确保总是获得胜利。最佳的例子或许就是Don Johnson,他在大西洋城赚的钱超过1500万美元,不是通过算牌,而是通过均衡几率和研究赌场。Johnson知道,获胜的唯一方法是理解系统和进行数学计算。但是在手机游戏中,数学计算并不是那么容易。在《Tiny Tower》中花费10美元或许等同于节省了100个小时的刷任务时间。唯一的获胜方法或许从电影中吸取教训,完全不接触此类游戏。(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

THE PSYCHOLOGY OF CASINO AND MOBILE GAME DESIGN

Norman Chan

At the end of Martin Scorsese’s movie Casino, Robert De Niro’s character laments the modern commercialization of Las Vegas–the transition from a romanticized notion of smokey Old Vegas to the glamorous family-friendly resorts which he disdainfully compares with Disneyland. But while De Niro’s Ace Rothstein scoffed at casinos turning into tourist attractions, it’s actually very good business. As Jonah Lehrer writes in a profile for The New Yorker (and excerpted in Wired), modern casino design is a very calculated business, crafted by interior designers that not only understand aesthetic appeal, but the psychology of the players gambling there.

The subject of Lehrer’s profile, Roger Thomas, is the brains behind the Bellagio and Wynn resorts, lavishly designed casinos which violated all previous rules in casino design–and making more money as a result. It’s not just about keeping patrons clueless about what time is it (casinos never have clocks) or designing labyrinth-like floorplans so players are constantly being funneled back to the casino floor, it’s also about subtly creating a pleasant atmosphere to reduce stress and convey a “playground” environment. University of Guelph professor Karen Finlay conducted a study testing various casino designs:

“The data is clear. Gamblers in a playground casino will stay longer, feel better, and bet more. Although they come away with bigger losses, they’re eager to return.”

Finlay notes that the effectiveness of such designs comes at the expense of the guests, who have been persuaded by flowers and nice furniture to squander money on games that are rigged in favor of the house. According to her findings, Thomas’s designs have a particularly marked effect on those guests who normally don’t gamble. The seduction of his décor, perhaps, is that it doesn’t feel like a gambling environment. The beauty is a kind of anesthesia, distracting people from the pain of their inevitable losses.

This got me thinking about how the psychology of design applies to the digital equivalent of slot machines–micro-transaction-based mobile games. And make no mistake, Angry Birds and Tiny Tower are very much analogues to casino games. They all exploit the same behavioral traits and tendencies that we’re all susceptible to. David Caolo’s piece on the behavioral exploitation in Angry Birds explains clearly how the game is a very traditional Skinner Machine, offering just enough positive reinforcement to keep players hooked. And often, players can’t control themselves, which has led to lawsuits over the issue of who’s to blame when people’s habits are exploited.

The advantage of mobile games is that the designers don’t have to spend hundreds of billions creating a comfortable and welcoming environment for you to play–you’re already playing in the places that are comfortable and convenient for you, like at home or during a commute. Instead of spending design efforts on set dressing, they can focus on making their money machines look and play as much like a game as possible. The cute 8-bit graphics of Tiny Tower is the mobile gaming equivalent of the Bellagio’s granite floors and marble statues–expertly designed distractions. Like casino designers, game designers never want you to think about the way your wallet is being drained. You’re not losing money, you’re spending it. And just as Las Vegas has slowly become more like Disneyland, our mobile games are becoming more like blackjack and slot machines.

The good news is that you can beat the system. The casinos don’t always win. That’s perhaps best exemplified by Don Johnson, the man who took Atlantic City for over $15 million, not by card counting, but by evening the odds and exploiting the casinos’ accommodations though negotiation. Johnson knew that the only way to win was by understanding the system and playing the math. But with mobile games, the math isn’t so easy. $10 spent in Tiny Tower may equate to a hundred hours otherwise spent grinding through game. The only winning move may be to take a cue from another movie, and not play at all. (Source: Tested)


上一篇:

下一篇: