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

设计师需重视合作型游戏设计的5大问题

发布时间:2012-11-15 14:22:55 Tags:,,,,

作者:Mathew Kumar

如果你正致力于创造一款合作游戏,并从中感受到巨大的压力,请不要担心,因为并不是只有你带有这种感受。

Funcom的资深游戏设计师Tanya Short在本周的Montreal International Game Summit上说道:“从根本上看来,合作型游戏是一种最复杂的模式。你的玩家不只会抱怨你的游戏,它们也会开始抱怨合作中的彼此。”

同时她也认为,如果合作机制是游戏设计的核心元素,那么合作游戏的优势便远远大于其劣势。

她说道:“现在的市面上已经出现了许多平行游戏。所以开发者认为它们可以通过创造无需让玩家共事的合作游戏而受益。即提供给玩家各种工具让他们能在自己创造的故事中关照彼此。”

她首先否定了认为合作机制应该摒除竞争元素的这种观念。

她说道:“我们总是很难阻止玩家去竞争,除非你不提供给玩家行动任何奖励。当你引进了两名玩家或更多合作事宜时,它们便会为了你所提供的任何资源展开竞争。”

以下是Short根据自己在Funcom的《神秘世界》,《科南时代》以及Facebook游戏《Fashion Week Live》的创作经历而总结的,有关合作游戏设计中存在的5大问题:

问题1:知识不协调

Short假设道:“也许你正在制作一款策略游戏,即玩家将一起思考并解决问题。而如果其中一名玩家所掌握的内容多于其他玩家,这种设置还不如独自游戏来得有趣。”

Short提出了一些最常见的解决方法,如使用实时合作模式。

她说道:“你可以对其他玩家下命令,但事实上每个玩家仍然在执行着自己的任务。”

她同样也列举了一些较特别的方法,如Thatgamecompany的在线游戏《Journey》所采取的“更具社交性”的解决方法,让玩家能够在游戏中以身作则。

“如果玩家打出‘跳到石头上,白痴’这样的字眼,这便不能算是一种合作游戏。”

她同样也提到了桌面游戏中的“秘密信息”理念。

她说道:“这种理念非常棒,但是在桌面游戏中更常见的策略还是鼓励或要求玩家隐藏信息。玩家间不能对彼此下命令,因为基于大量信息,它们很难找到最合适的解决方法,而终将引起彼此的猜疑。我希望看到更多合作游戏能够以《Werewolf》或其它设有秘密信息的游戏为榜样。”

问题2:技能不协调

Short说道:“当某些玩家的技能优于其他玩家时,游戏也将失去乐趣。团队中的任何人都不愿看到力量悬殊的存在。”

Short所看到的最常见的解决方法包括将失败状态(或者不应该说是失败,而是缺少成功)和失败技能从胜利状态中完全删除(“这种做法在桌面游戏中非常常见——玩家能够共同游戏,但是不强调谁会赢过谁,或者说如果游戏是关于作画,那么成功的状态便是‘你完成了一副画作’,而不管你是否是一名比我出色的画家”)。

Age of Conan(from thecimmerian)

Age of Conan(from thecimmerian)

她还赞扬了那些让新玩家或缺少技能的玩家能够出力,同时也让更多资深玩家能够受益的理念。她列举了在《科南时代》创作过程中,他们为了提高玩家留存而创造了公会奖励。该团队执行了“公会级别”理念,如果公会中的个人行动能够提高了公会级别,那么公会中的所有成员便都能够获得奖励。

但是问题还是未能得到解决:如何保持硬核玩家与休闲玩家的平衡。

“解决方法便是面向这两个群组使用两种不同层面的奖励。面向硬核玩家的排行榜将每周奖励最优秀的手工公会,PVE等。另一方面,休闲公会则需要花更长的时间去完成进程级别。”

问题3:公开的羞耻心

Short表示:“有些玩家并不希望与别人一起玩游戏,因为他们认为在别人面前犯错是件非常尴尬的事。”

常见的解决方法便是在游戏开始阶段提供私人教程,或为新人玩家提供相应的帮助渠道(Short提醒道,许多玩家比起求助,更宁愿转身离开游戏)。

对于那些想要独自游戏的玩家来说,Short认为单人游戏模式便非常合适,但是开发者也必须搞清楚他们设计游戏的目标到底是什么。她认为:“创造单人游戏模式非常耗成本,如果你的目标是创造合作游戏,你就需要在这点上有所节制了。”

就像在《Fashion Week Live》中(游戏邦注:玩家可以在游戏中创造并分享他们的流行服饰),Short的团队便吸取了一些建设性意见,即让玩家可以为别人的服饰“评级”,以此推动玩家间的沟通与交流。如果玩家能够匿名评级,他们便可以更加轻松地打压其他玩家,阻止别人创造出比自己优秀的服装。而如果评级必须公开个人资料,玩家间也能够相互公开负面(或正面)评级,并在此展开真正的较量。

Short说道:“我们最终采取的方法刚好介于这两者之间。即玩家可以看到别人对自己的评级,并查看对方的资料以及整体评级,但是个人评级则是保密的。”

“我们同样也设置了最低评级标准,从而确保不管对方给出怎样的评级玩家都不会过于沮丧。即总共有4颗星,而2颗星便是最低评级标准。”

问题4:没有主角

Short问道:“当你不是主角的时候,最好的情况便是只有你和自己的好友是主角,而最糟糕的情况则是你只是众多主角中的一个。对此你会怎么做?”

Short说道:“最常见的方法便是提供给玩家创造性的表达方法,”如角色定制。但是,“许多开发者都局限于这种定制形式中,”忽视了像定制住家空间,提供独特的行为和动画等方法。

她同样也主张专门化,如区分坦克,医疗者或最佳打手,从而让玩家能够有效地区分自己的身份与行为。

问题5:玩家间的摩擦

Short承认:“将两个玩家放置在一起存在着一个迫切需要解决的问题,即他们总是不能善待对方,即使你希望他们这么做。”

她说道:“最常见的方法便是在玩家失利时减少他们需要接受的惩罚。但是如果玩家一直在指责对方的失误,那么减少惩罚也不可能带来多大的帮助。因为既然他们都不能彼此信任,肯定也不可能有效地进行合作。”

Short建议开发者最好能够提供“自我选择的风险”。

“让玩家能够选择自己所信任的伙伴;如果最后对方让你感到失望,那也只能怪你自己选择失误。”

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

5 problems with co-op game design (and possible solutions)

By Mathew Kumar

If you’re making a co-op video game and it feels like an overwhelming task, don’t worry — it’s not just you who feels this way.

“Designing for co-op is basically designing in hard mode,” said Tanya Short, senior gameplay designer at Funcom, speaking at the Montreal International Game Summit this week. “Your players will not only complain about your game, they’ll start complaining about each other.”

But she argued that the benefits of co-op play far outweigh the negatives — as long as the co-op is integral to the game design.

“Right now there is a lot of parallel play,” she said. “Developers think that they can get the benefit of co-op games without actually letting players work together. It’s more that you should give players the tools to allow them start caring about each other in a story they create together.”

Her first warning was to disavow any thoughts that co-operative mechanics should exclude considering the competitive implications.

“It’s very difficult to [keep players from] competing, unless you do not reward the players for anything they do,” she said. “Any time you introduce two players or more working together, they will also be competing for any resources you offer.”

Short identified what she saw as the five main problems facing co-operative game designers, drawing on her experience working on games such as Funcom’s The Secret World, Age of Conan and Facebook game Fashion Week Live:

Problem 1: Knowledge Mismatch

“Maybe you are making a strategic game, where players must think and solve a problem together,” Short hypothesized. “Well, if one player knows a lot more than the other, this becomes less fun than playing alone.”

Short considered some commonly-used solutions, such as having the solution require real-time co-operation.

“You can give the orders,” she said, “but each player still has to do it themselves.”

She also offered some more unusual solutions, praising Thatgamecompany’s online game Journey for having a “more social” solution that requires players to lead by example.

“If people could type in ‘jump to the top of the rock, you moron’ it wouldn’t be as co-operative.”

She also drew the concept of “secret information” from board games.

“I have yet to see this used very well, but a common tactic in board games is to encourage or require players to keep some information back,” she said. “Players can’t give each other orders because they don’t definitively know the correct solution based on the widely available information. This can also lead to distrust of each other; I would love to see more co-op games based on Werewolf or other secret information games.”

Problem 2: Skill Mismatch

“When someone is better than you in skill, that is even less fun,” said Short. “Everyone on the team resents this, the stronger players and the ‘weak link.’”

Common solutions Short saw included removing failure states (“No failure, only lack of success”) and removing skill from the win state entirely (“This is common in board games — let players play together, but whoever wins wins; or if the game is just about making a painting and the win state is ‘you made a painting,’ what difference does it matter if you are a better artist than me?”)

Short particularly praised any concepts that allow the newest or least-skilled players to still contribute and be useful in a way that also allows more experienced players to benefit. She called on an example from her time on Age of Conan, where the requirement was to create a reward for guilds that would encourage player retention. The team implemented the concept of “guild levels,” where individual actions within the guild would work to increase the guild’s level and reward all the members of the guild.

However, a problem remained: balancing this between hardcore and casual players.

“The solution that rewarded both groups was two tiers of rewards. Leaderboards for the hardcore that every week would reward the top crafting guild, top PVE, and so on. On the other side was the progression levels which took casual guilds a long time to get through.”

Problem 3: Public Humilation

“Some people genuinely don’t want to play with others. They just want to be left alone because they find the idea of making mistakes in front of others embarrassing,” Short said.

Common solutions for this include offering a private tutorial at the start of the game, and offering a help channel for newbies (Short warned, however, that a lot of players would rather quit than actively ask for help).

For the players who genuinely want to play alone, Short admitted that a single-player mode could serve a purpose, but asked developers to consider what the goal of their game design actually is. “A single player mode is extremely expensive; if your goal is truly to create player co-operation you will have to limit it,” she argued.

In Fashion Week Live, a game in which players can create and share fashions they have designed Short’s team were told they must encourage player interaction and collaboration by allowing players to “rate” each other’s fashions. If players were allowed to leave anonymous ratings, they could easily attempt to tear down other players, and players could be discouraged from creating fashions. If ratings revealed profiles, then players could also reciprocally hand out negative (or positive) ratings and again attempt to game the system.

“What we ended up doing was somewhere in between,” Short said. People could see who left them a rating and visit their profile, and see their overall rating, but it was a secret what each individual rating was.

“We also made sure there was a minimum rating so no matter what, you wouldn’t be too discouraged; two stars out of four is the minimum.”

Problem 4: No Protagonist

“You’re not the protagonist anymore. At best you and your friend are the protagonists, at worst you are one of many. What do you do about this?” asked Short.

“It’s most popular to give the player creative expression,” Short said, such as character customization. However, “a lot of developers don’t consider other forms of customization,” she continued, such as customizing a home space, offering unique behaviors and animations.

She also contended that being able to specialize — such as the divisions between a tank, a healer, or a damage dealer — allows players to differentiate themselves and their behaviors from others.

Problem 5: Jerks

“There’s an instant problem in putting even two people together,” Short admitted. “They’re not always nice to each other, even when you want them to be.

“It’s most popular to limit what happens to a player when they lose. But if someone really screws another player over and they lose everything, I am sorry, that sucks, but I don’t think making it less possible to lose is a solution,” she said. “Without the ability to trust someone else with everything, you won’t truly cooperate.”

Short’s most recommended solution was to offer “self-selected risk.”

“You can choose who to trust; if they choose to grief you, that was your mistake.” (source:gamasutra)


上一篇:

下一篇: