作者：Zoya Street

问题：

有位读者写道：

“我现在一直在琢磨着为什么卡牌战斗游戏（如《Rage of Bahamut》）能够取得如此大的成功，它们似乎未能遵守许多游戏开发规则。”你能否帮助读者解决这一问题？

Rage of Bahamut(from games.com)

答案：

Harry Holmwood——MarvelousAQL Europe首席执行官

我并不认为卡牌战斗游戏将会成为未来西方市场中的一大主流游戏。当然了，从收益来看《Rage of Bahamut》已经在日本和西方市场取得了巨大的成功，但是真正让我担心的还是越来越多开发者将制作交换卡牌游戏（TCG）当成获取名利的主要工具。

尽管西方市场已经拥有一些受欢迎的“现实”卡牌战斗游戏，但是它们却不是主流理念，当然了我也不希望这一市场只能呈现出当前所拥有的一些游戏类型。从西方玩家的角度来看，《Rage of Bahamut》所呈现的是一种相对笨拙的游戏体验——不仅反应迟钝，同时还拥有奇怪的UI和有限的互动，但是其用户留存情况，盈利和病毒式/用户推广系统却相当出色。

我认为开发者应该更加重视人们到底喜欢卡牌战斗游戏的哪些元素，例如收集，升级，创造桥牌的策略，多人挑战，稀有道具，以及即将获得新道具的激动感或一些普通内容，而不是游戏本身。从本质上来看，《CSR赛车》便是一款纸牌战斗游戏，只是它用汽车取代了纸牌，让那些从未玩过《万智牌》或《游戏王》的玩家能够感受到不一样的纸牌游戏魅力。不管对象是汽车，足球贴纸，列车车次，邮票还是士兵，人们的天性就是喜欢收集和培养事物，并与志同道合之人分享收集到的事物。

Melissa Clark-Reynolds——MiniMonos创始人

已经出现了许多糟糕的卡牌战斗游戏。

我的员工们在过去几年时间里已经玩过《魔兽世界》，《口袋妖怪》，《游戏王》以及《Ninjitsu》。我知道他们想要创造TCG，但是我却认为这还不是一个具有发展潜力的市场。

我发现研究游戏玩法vs.可收集性非常有趣。我认为只有少数玩家属于游戏的超级粉丝，并且也只有这些玩家真正将购买当成是一种收集行为。

我同样也在好奇“在线交换纸牌游戏”将如何获取成功。最近《Fight my Monster》刚刚进入英国市场。有时候，最简单且最多元化元素便能创造出最棒且最具吸引力的游戏。

Dylan Collins——《Fight my Monster》执行总裁

我认为《Bahamut》和《Fight my Monster》的目标用户群体具有显著的差异性。

《Fight my Monster》的成功虽然很大程度是因为TCG机制，但是还有其它针对于年龄段的原因。

我赞同这类游戏将出现许多失败案例的说法，如Spinmaster的《Redakai》。它们的共同点即大量的预算+物理元素+TV+游戏+纸牌，但却缺少足够的吸引力。

Mark Sorrell——Hide & Seek开发总监

我更倾向于认为机制是游戏成功的主要原因而非暗喻。实际上卡牌战斗游戏本质上就是一种服务型游戏，适合免费盈利策略，具有社交性，突出异步多人游戏玩法并支持gacha/博彩游戏机制。

我们将会发现许多抛弃了暗喻而保留了机制的游戏已经获得了巨大的收益。我们同样也会发现许多糟糕的卡牌战斗游戏未能做到这一点。

就像《口袋妖怪》在这点上便表现得很出色。

Stuart Dredge——《卫报》记者

我非常想看看Rovio将现实中的纸牌与某些游戏结合在一起。

我想如果有谁能够将现实中的卡片收集与数字游戏结合在一起，Rovio便是最佳人选。

但是他们却需要为此添加更多的鸟，也许这也是他们还未进行尝试的主要原因。

Will Luton——手机游戏顾问

最近我为Gamasutra写了一篇有关《万智牌》能够教会我们什么的文章。

现代gacha游戏之所以如此让人上瘾主要包含了一些心理元素：

这是零和竞争（至少最受欢迎的游戏是这样的）：也就是“Bartle模型”（游戏邦注：用于定义多人虚拟世界中的玩家类型）中的“杀手”将变成受成就驱动的玩家类型，即愿意在游戏中投入更多钱。

不管是在gacha机制还是纸牌回合或者战斗机制中都包含了各种“强化”元素，从而能够有效地吸引玩家的注意力。

收集元素将控制着玩家的大脑，推动着他们去寻找稀有资源并追求完整性。

通常还会包含一些有效的社交元素，如有限的好友列表，这能够维系起玩家间的关系。

就像Harry所提到的，也是我认为创造卡牌战斗游戏最关键的一点是，要意识到纸牌本身是最不重要的元素。我们不能照搬纸上游戏设计——并且需要确保游戏中包含所有的强制性元素。

许多人都不清楚到底怎样的TCG才能真正带给玩家乐趣——对于开发者来说这可能是最难创造的游戏类型，但是如果能够创造出真正优秀的TCG，开发者便能够获得巨大的收益。

Oscar Clark——Applifier倡导者

我认为最佳纸牌游戏将包含以下机制：

可爱/华丽的外观：尽管这是一种主观元素；

可收集性/包含稀有内容：应该有人提及这一点了，并且这也是遵循着gatcha原则；

独立的规则：核心内容是简单的，但是纸牌上也能呈现出一些带有层次的复杂性；

可以重复的核心机制：带有更快速的游戏频率而不是无聊的角色扮演；

模糊的策略：让玩家可以适应自己的游戏类型并分帮结派；

明确的胜利条件：主要取决于纸牌的选择（所以玩家需要购买更多纸牌）。

这些内容都遵守设计规则。所以我们自然能够将其带进在线游戏世界中，从而实现规则自动化并加速运转时间。除此之外，这还能为玩家所喜欢的纸牌分级，为游戏增添个性并增强用户粘性。

实际上，所有获得成功的卡牌战斗游戏都非常有趣，能够在你推动“收集”和“探索”奖励行为并将其整合到免费模式中时明确地呈现出相关内容。同时，在免费MMO游戏（如《Free Realms》和《星球大战：克隆战争历险记》）中添加TCG模式也是一种有趣的尝试。

但是不得不承认的是我并不是《Rage of Bahamut》的粉丝，我认为游戏教程太过笨拙，并且游戏机制也不是很有趣。相比之下我更喜欢《HellFire》——我已经沉迷于游戏好几周了，或《Urban Rivals》和《Cabals》——都具有非常真实的游戏策略，并能够将玩家所选择的角色清楚地呈现在他们面前，让他们觉得自己的投入是有价值的。

（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）

Why are card battle games so popular? [Gamesbriefers]

By Zoya Street

Question:

A reader writes:

“Right now I’m at pains to figure out what makes card battle games (Rage of Bahamut…) so successful and how they seem to disregard so many of our game development rules”. Can you help GAMESbrief’s readers understand what makes them tick, against all expectations?”

Answers:

Harry Holmwood CEO of MarvelousAQL Europe

Personally I would be cautious about thinking that card battle games are going to become a major mainstream product in the west.  Of course, Rage of Bahamut has been very successful in terms of revenues, both in Japan and in the west, but it concerns me that huge numbers of developers think that making their own trading card game ( TCG) is now their route to fame and fortune.

Although the west does have a handful of popular ‘real world’ card battle games, it’s not such a mainstream concept as it is in Japan, and I don’t expect that the market will sustain the hundreds, or possibly thousands, of similar games which are now in development in the west.  From a western gamer’s perspective, Rage of Bahamut is a pretty clunky experience – unresponsive and strange UI, limited interaction… but a very cleverly designed retention, monetization and virality/user promotion system.

My advice is people should think less about card battlers, and more about what it is people like about card battlers – collection, upgrading, the strategy of building a deck, the multiplayer challenge, the rarity of certain items, the frisson of excitement when you about to get a new item and you don’t know whether you’re going to get something rare and exciting, or something bog standard and commonplace.  CSR racing is, at its heart, a card battle game – it just replaces the cards with cars, and opened itself up to an audience who’ll never play Magic The Gathering or Yu-Gi-Oh.  Whether it’s cars, football stickers, train numbers, stamps or lead soldiers – people like collecting and nurturing stuff, and using that collection to socialise or play with like-minded fans.

Melissa Clark-Reynolds Founder of MiniMonos

There are a lot of them already that have bombed, or haven’t done at all well.

Does anyone have any analysis of the ones that work vs not?  My staff have played WoW, Pokemon, Yugioh and CP’s Ninjitsu  over the past few years.  I know they would love to do a TCG but we don’t think the market is there.

I have found it interesting looking at the gameplay vs collectability of these.  It seems to me that only a very small percentage of people who are uber fans actually play the games, and most of the them are purchased as collectables.

I am also interested to see how the “online trading card games” pan out.  Fight my Monster being the most recent in the UK.  Sometimes the simpler the dynamic, the better the engagement.

Dylan Collins Executive chairman of Fight my Monster

Well, I suspect significant difference between demographics for Bahamut and Fight My Monster (8-12) that skews things somewhat

FMM succeeds because of the TCG mechanic but probably for a bunch of other reasons which are specific to that age bracket (visuals, merch etc.).

I agree with general assessment of lots of incoming failures: just look at Spinmaster’s Redakai. Big budget + physical + TV + game + holographic cards. But not much traction.

Mark Sorrell Development director at Hide & Seek

I’d agree with the idea that it’s the mechanics, not the metaphor that’s the point/reason for success. Card-battling games are inherently a game-as-service, inherently fit a fremium monetisation strategy, are inherently social, inherently feature asynchronous multiplayer and inherently support gatcha/gambling mechanics.

I’d suggest that we’ll see a decent number of games that break the metaphor and retain the mechanics and make a giant pile of money. I’d also agree that we’ll see a lot of really quite bad straight-up card battlers that won’t.

This is Pokemon we’re talking about here. Pokemon did alright.

Stuart Dredge Journalist at The Guardian

I’d quite like to see Rovio have a go at bringing together physical cards sold in the real world and some kind of game.

There are good reasons why I’m a hack and not head of new business development at Rovio, obviously, but if anyone has a good shot at bringing together physical card collecting and digital gaming, it’s them.

They’d need a helluva lot more birds, mind, which may be the best reason for never doing this.

Will Luton Mobile games consultant

I’m currently writing a piece for Gamastura about what Magic: the Gathering can teach us and have designed, played and consulted on several paper and digital TCGs.

There’s a lot of psychology going on behind modern gacha-fusion games which make them addicting:

They’re zero sum competitive (at least the very popular ones are): So Bartle killer types are served and they tend to be type-A driven people who play lots and spend lots.

Packed with variable reinforcement both in gacha (aka boosters) and in card turn and / or battle mechanic that keep players on the edge of an “epic pull”.

Have collection elements which tugs on the parts of the brain that seeks deficiency of a resource and nags for completeness.

Often have lots of clever social elements in, like limited friend lists, which creates commitment between players.

The point that Harry makes, which I’ve always claimed is key to card battlers, is that the least important thing is the cards. They don’t have to mimic the paper game to work – as long as all of the compulsion elements are there, then we’re all good.

Lots of people will get this totally wrong. They will also fundamentally misunderstand what makes a TCG fun for players – they’re possibly one of the most difficult games to build, but if they hit the rewards are massive.

I have my eye on one called SolForge.

Oscar Clark Evangelist at Applifier

I should own up that I bought my first pack of MTG at Gencon UK in Camber Sands as I recall I was 3rd in the queue when they opened the first box (but my nostalgia might be playing tricks with me). So like Will I’m a bit of a geek on the subject.

For me the mechanisms the best Card Games leverage are:

Cute/Gorgeous Art: although this is subjective of course

Collectability/Rarity: which will has explained and that follows Gatcha principles)

Self-contained rules: the core are simple, but with layered complexity described on the card

Highly repeatable core mechanism: and a much faster rate of play than the equivilent rpg of the time

Ambiguous strategy: which allows players to adapt to their playing style and to fuel factions

Clear Winning Conditions: where your card selection is to blame not you (hence buy more cards)

All of which fit the principles behind the Design Rules pretty well. Bringing this into the online world as a service is (as others have said) very natural not least because it allows further automation of the rules and an even faster turn-around time. Additionally, it adds obvious progression for your favourite cards; building personalisation and engagement.

The fact that these games are being successful is actually really interesting, they demonstrate what happens when you stimulate the ‘collecting’ and ‘exploring’ reward behaviours as well as the  desire to ‘create’ and how that can be applied to freemium.  Its also intersting to see how the TCG model has been adopted in Freemium MMOs such as Free Realms and StarWars:Clone Wars Adventures.

However, I’m not a fan of Rage of Bahamut personally. I think the Tutorial is clumsy and the play mechanic doesn’t grab me. However, I can see how you could get sucked in.  Instead I prefer HellFire – which I’ve been playing for several weeks now (although not spending) or the very excellent Urban Rivals and Cabals both of which manage to have genuine strategy and a way to show you what characters you could recruit that makes spending seem worthwhile.(source:gamesbrief）