作者：Jukka Hilvonen

我花了许多时间与手机游戏玩家进行交谈并尝试着了解他们的需求，动机，局限性和行为从而让我们在Seepia Games能够为特定用户群组创造出最棒的游戏。

lens(from gamasutra)

在我了解手机玩家的任务中，我发现了一组游戏设计维度，即开发者可以使用它们为特定玩家创造更棒的游戏。虽然它们都不是经过科学验证的群组，但却是源自经验的概念框架。

我希望这一框架能够帮助其他开发者们更好地了解他们的用户并使用该框架去引导自己的游戏设计。

1.游戏体验时间

关于玩家如何投入时间去玩游戏所包含的第一个元素。

首先，存在一些休闲玩家会在空闲的时候通过玩游戏去娱乐自己（游戏邦注：如在上厕所的时候玩游戏）。根据我的经验，对于这些玩家来说游戏就是在没有其它事可做时的一种有趣的消遣工具。换句话说，他们会玩休闲游戏去消耗时间，但是一旦出现其它事他们也会很轻松地停下游戏。

其次是中核玩家，即他们会在自己的每日行程中安排游戏时间。这意味着他们会基于自己的空闲时间去养成游戏习惯。中核玩家会更加沉浸于游戏中，一旦他们对游戏上瘾，他们便不能像休闲玩家那样轻松离开游戏。我认为自己便属于中核游戏玩家。现在我主要玩两款免费游戏，并且我也在空闲时间养成了游戏习惯，所以我可以不用花钱地在游戏中前进。

最后是硬核玩家，他们通常都会围绕着游戏去安排时间。对于这些玩家来说玩游戏是一件非常有趣且吸引人的事，远胜过生活中的许多其它事。这也是为何他们要合理安排时间给予游戏更多关注和忽视其它活动的原因。举个例子来说吧，我的兄弟便是一名硬核玩家。他并不会在乎花掉50%的工资去购买PC的新装备从而能够在更优质的显示屏上玩游戏。同样地他也不在乎熬夜到早上6点去获取如何打败一个强大终极boss的新方法。

当然了在现实生活中，这种分类并不像这里这么明显。真正的《Candy Crush》硬核玩家每天都会玩很久很久的游戏。也有些并不是那么硬核的《部落战争》玩家会只是为了消磨时间而玩游戏。

所以你该如何使用这样的第一个镜头去做出有关游戏设计的决定？首先你需要记下这些分类。如果你正在开发一款面向25至45岁的男性用户的免费手机游戏，那么要求他们每天花大量时间去玩游戏便不是一种有效的决定。你当然可以做出这样的决定，但当你去考虑业务模式或目标平台（因为你的目标用户群组将没有足够的自由时间去玩游戏）时你便会发现这并不是一个最佳决定。

所以你需要考虑基于不同类型的游戏和目标用户群体的不同玩家的不同行为，人们每天所拥有的休闲时间也是不同的。从一个较广的角度来看，年轻人往往拥有更多休闲时间，更少的可支配收入且更少专注于游戏的动机。随着人们年纪的增长，他们的休闲时间也随之变少，可支配收入会变多，并且将能够更多地专注于游戏中。

2.目标习惯

你可以用于检测不同目标用户群体的第二个镜头便是目标习惯。从根本上来看这意味着你需要考虑人们在日常生活中本来的习惯以及他们是如何养成新习惯。

我们中的大多数人每天都会刷两次牙，一次在早上起床后，一次是在晚上睡觉前。而智能手机和其它手机设备也创造了一些逐渐根植于我们日常生活的小习惯，如时不时检查手机信息。

游戏开发者可以先了解人们玩游戏的触发条件是什么。当你了解了这点，你便能够根据玩家的习惯去创造你的游戏。

其次，游戏开发者可以使用习惯构成心理因素在游戏中创造吸引人的习惯养成循环。举个例子来说吧，每日任务便是游戏中非常有效的创造习惯的工具。 你可以让新玩家无需投入太多精力而开始“每日任务”，如采取1,2个行动去完成每日刷任务，并随着玩家在1,2周内养成基本习惯后延长刷任务的时间。这里的关键便在于你需要去思考如何帮助玩家更轻松地养成新习惯。

3.Bartle的性格分类

我并不打算描述Bartle的分类方式，因为这应该是所有人都知道的基本玩家分类。

我之所以在这里提到这一分类是为了提醒开发者不同人具有不同的游戏动机和目标。有些人在看到明确的目标后便会努力去实现这一目标（成就者），也有些人更希望参与游戏中的社交活动（社交者）。再一次地因为不同人拥有不同类型玩家的某些特质，所以这里也不存在明显的分界线。在游戏过程中玩家也有可能从某种类型玩家变成另一种类型的玩家。

Diagram(from gamasutra)

Bartle的玩家分类也许并不适合所有条件或者不同类型的游戏，但它却能够帮助你更清楚地面对游戏中更多不同的玩家类型。根据我的经验，基于不同游戏类型，这些分类的可用性也不同，例如我发现免费手机策略游戏中许多玩家是成就者和探索者的结合体，即他们会在游戏提供的自由时间内找到自己能够尽快前进的可行行动组合。在这里前进可能指代收集游戏内部资源，升级单位或提升排行。

结论

这一框架的关键在于思考你该如何将这一玩家类别与框架中的其它元素结合在一起。如果你瞄准的是25至45岁且热爱技术的上班族男性，你便需要在你的游戏设计中考虑他们的日常生活。首先你需要了解他们拥有多少空闲时间去玩游戏，他们会如何以及何时使用这些时间。根据我的经验，我认为这一年龄阶层的玩家通常是在早上以及经过一天辛苦工作后为了放松而玩游戏。另一方面，如果你瞄准的是较年轻的玩家，如18至24岁，他们将拥有更多空闲时间，即经常会为了消耗时间去玩游戏并且喜欢在游戏中社交。但是他们通常都很难集中注意力较长时间，即意味着他们更倾向于玩休闲游戏而不是那些需要投入超过1,2分钟的游戏。

让我们进一步以《Clash Royale》和《星球大战：银河英雄》如何进行不同的设计为例。这两款游戏都拥有相似的目标用户群体，即主要是25岁以上的男性用户，但是当提到习惯和时间时，它们又是不同的。首先，《银河英雄》拥有较长的每日任务需要玩家花费30分钟至1个小时去完成它们。而这只是每日任务。如果你是一名资深玩家，你便希望使用所有免费的可能性去升级游戏提供给你的军队。与Supercell相比，艺电在实时操作方面采取的是截然不同的策略，即在2月9日发布的最新更新内容中，他们提供给了玩家名为“Bonus FREE energy”的额外能源。

相反地，Supercell采取了一种不同的策略。《星球大战》依赖于限定时间事件，每月事件和不同游戏模式，而《Clash Royale》则只专注于玩家对抗玩家比赛（一种游戏模式）和基于玩家的习惯养成循环。在《Clash Royale》中，玩家可以按照自己的喜好去游戏，但在某一点上，游戏内部货币和纸牌奖励将关闭，玩家将只能通过收集奖牌去提高排名。这里真正突出的地方便在于奖励收集和累积的作用。游戏拥有不同类型的宝箱能够提供给玩家不同类型的奖励。为了获得奖励玩家首先需要打开宝箱。基于宝箱类型，开启时间可能在3至8个小时。而玩家可以决定何时开始开启这些宝箱。

对于我来说这种策略非常有效。早上我起床后便能够获得来自8个小时的Gold Chest的奖励。然后我将玩几轮游戏，获得宝箱，并花费3个小时去打开Silver Chest。之后我将在午休期间继续游戏并再一次开启另一个Silver Chest。当我下班回家后，我将继续另一轮游戏以及另一轮开启Silver Chest的任务。这一天我最后一次玩游戏是在睡觉前，当我开始开启Gold Chest时我便会想着明天早上我将开启哪个宝箱呢？

让我们再次回到框架中，最终这不再是关于用户群组如何表现的问题，而是关于创造一个可靠的过程去识别你的目标用户群组，他们的需求，习惯，目标以及玩游戏时的想法等等。我将这一过程称为用户发展过程。

我认为这也很适合游戏业务。尽管我们并不是在寻找可靠的业务模式。根据经验，作为游戏开发者的我们非常擅于想出具有创造性的理念并去使用各种直觉和创意。但是对于结合创造性和研究过程去发现并验证用户需求和目标也存在挑战。通常情况下我们总是希望能够坚持第一个突出理念，尽管可能会出现各种反对意见。而我的任务便是基于用户的想法去找出真相从而帮助我们创造出真正优秀的游戏并有效利用我们的创意理念。最终，我们在此都是希望能够为玩家创造出几年后依旧记得的真正有趣的游戏体验。我也希望这一框架能够带给你们的游戏设计一定帮助。

（本文为游戏邦/gamerboom.com编译，拒绝任何不保留版权的转发，如需转载请联系：游戏邦）

Game design lenses help target your games

by Jukka Hilvonen

A lot of my time goes into talking with mobile game players and trying to understand their needs, motivations, constraints and behaviors so that we here at Seepia Games could make the best games for our specific user group.

On my quest to understand mobile players, I’ve come across a set of game design dimensions through which we – the developers – can use to develop better games for a given target group. This is by no means scientifically validated set of dimensions but rather, a conceptual framework that is born out of experience.

I hope this framework helps fellow devs to better understand their users and make better games by using the framework to direct the design of the games. Also, if you feel that the framework misses any important elements, feel free to write me or leave a comment below. But for now, let’s just dive in to the first one.

1. Temporal Experience of Games

Mid-core games

The first element revolves around how gamers devote their time to playing games.

In the first end, there are casual players who entertains themselves with games when time presents itself (e.g. playing when taking a dump). In my experience, for these players, games are fun hobby that is done when there is nothing else to do. In other words, they are killing time with casual games, but they also can put the game aside very easily when another opportunity comes by.

Mid-core players, on the other hand, arrange their gaming around their daily schedule. This means that they form playing habits based on their free time, which can dictate how they progress through the game . Mid-core players are more involved in the game itself and when they are hooked, don’t leave so quickly from the game as the casual players do. I count myself as a mid-core gamer. I’m playing currently two F2P games and I have formed playing habits around my free time so that I can meaningfully progress in the games without spending money.

Lastly, hardcore players typically arrange their schedules around their gaming. For them, playing games is a very fun and engaging activity – more so than many other activities in life. That’s why they are willing to make the arrangements so that other parts of life get less attention and games get more. For example, my brother is a hardcore gamer. He doesn’t mind if he spends 50% of his salary to buy a new equipment to his PC so that he can play the latest game with the best graphics. Also, he doesn’t mind staying up until 6am on Saturday morning to investigate the newest tactics how to get over that one really difficult end boss or whatever.

Of course in real life, the categorization is not so tight and clear as in here. There are real hardcore players of Candy Crush who play games hours and hours per day without even thinking about it. And there are not-so hardcore players of Clash of Clans who just play the game to kill time and fight boredom.

So how you can use this first lens to make informed decisions in your game design? Well, first off by recognizing that there are such categorizations. If you are developing a mobile F2P game to males between 25-45 years of age, it may not be the best decision to require them to spend hours and hours of time in the game per day to make any kind of progress in the game. Or, you can of course make the decision, but then it may not be the best decision considering your business model and target platform since that demographic group don’t typically have a lot of free time to spend on gaming.

So you need to take into account that different people behave differently with different kinds of games and based on the demographic targeting, people usually different amounts of free time in their daily life. On a very broad and “black and white” perspective, young people tend to have more free time, less disposable income and tend to be less motivated and focused to gaming. As people get older, they tend to have less free time, more disposable income and they tend to be more focused and are able to exert more focused attention to gaming.

2. Habitual targeting

Second lens which you can use to examine different target groups of games is habitual targeting. In essence, this mean to take into consideration that people have ingrained habits in their daily life AND that people also form new habits all the time.

Most of us usually brush teeth twice per day; once after getting out of bed in the morning and once before going back to bed in the evening. Smartphones and other mobile devices have also created a set of tiny habits which are ingrained to our daily life, such as checking our phones all the time.

Game developers can use the habitual targeting first by understanding which triggers cause people to play games. When you understand which triggers cause people to play games, you can tailor your game to their habits.

Secondly, game developers can use the psychology of habit forming to create compelling habit creation loops inside their games. For instance, daily quests are particularly effective tools inside games for habit creation. One novel idea might be to start the “daily grind” for new players with minimal effort – maybe 1 or 2 actions to complete the daily grind – and prolong the grind as players have formed the basis of the habit in one or two weeks. The key is to think how to help players form new habits as easily as possible.

3. Bartle’s personality categorization

I’m not going to describe Bartle’s categorization since it is so fundamental categorization player types that everyone should have read it. Those who haven’t read it, you can find the original article here.

Anyways, the point to include the categorization here is to remind fellow devs that different people have different kinds of motivations and goals in games. Some give themselves clear and explicit goals which they then strive to achieve (achievers) while others want to engage into social activities in games (socializers). Again, there are no clear lines here since different people posses aspects from different kinds of types of players. Also, players tend to drift from one type to another in the course of a game.

Bartle categorization might not suit for every kind of situation and for different kinds of games, but it gives you a good overview of the broad types of players within the game. In my experience, some of these apply a little bit differently depending on what type of game you are making. For example, I have noticed that a lot of people in mobile F2P strategy games are a mix of achievers and explorers in a sense that they are constantly finding the optimal set of actions which they can use to progress as fast as possible within the free time which the game grants them to play. Term “progress” might be either collecting in-game resources, leveling up their units or buildings or going up in leaderboards. Since I haven’t personally been able to categorize these players either as achievers or explorers I’ve coined them as “optimizers”.

Conclusion

The key in this framework is to think how you can use this categorization of player types together with other elements in the framework. Again, if you are targeting employed males of 25-45 years old who are technology enthusiasts, you’d need to consider their daily life in your game design. First step is to understand how much free time they can devote to playing games, and how and when they do it. In my experience, I can say that typically players in this age group are playing games in the morning and after work to relax after hard work day. On the other hand, if you target younger people, aged 18-24 I would guess that they have more free time, usually play games for killing time and like to socialize in the game as well. They also tend to have a lot shorter time frame of focus, meaning that they are more likely to play more casual games than games that require more than a minute or two of focused attention.

To give you a more concrete example, think how Clash Royale and Star Wars: Galaxy of Heroes target their design so much differently. Both have similar demographic targeting; dominantly male, aged 25 or above, but when it comes to habitual and temporal targeting, the games are quite different. First of all, Galaxy of Heroes has quite long set of daily quests which takes anything from 30 minutes to 1 hours to complete them. And that’s only the daily quests. If you are a real optimizer, you want to use all free possibilities to upgrade and level up your troops which the game offers. Also, EA has different strategy in the live ops phase than Supercell since after the latest update on Feb 09, they constantly give you this extra energy called “Bonus FREE energy” on top of the already quite lofty energy.

Supercell, on the other hand, has quite a different strategy. Whereas Star Wars relies heavily on limited-time events, monthly events and different game modes, Clash Royale is solely focused on PvP matches (one game mode) and player-initiated habit formation loops. In Clash Royale, players can play as much as they like, but at one point, the in-game currency and card-rewards will go off, and players only gather trophies to level-up their rank. What is genius, is how the reward gathering and accumulation works. The game has different kinds of chests which grant players different kinds of rewards. To get the rewards, players first need to unlock the chest. Depending on the type of the chest, the unlocking takes 3 or 8 hours. And players can decide when to the clock starts ticking on these chests.

For me, this works like a charm. I get up from the bed in the morning, I get the rewards from nights 8-hour Gold Chest. Then, I play few rounds of the game, get chests, and unlock Silver Chest which takes 3 hours. Next time I’ll play during lunch time in work, and again start to unlock another Silver Chest. When I get home after work, another round and another Silver chest. Last time when I play the game is before going to bed, when I start the unlocking of Gold Chest, which I’ll unlock the next morning. Brilliant or what?

Going back to the framework – in the end, it’s not about throwing ideas how one user group MIGHT behave, but actually develop a solid process to identify and validate your target user group, their needs, habit and goals and what they are looking in games when they are playing those. I’m calling this process a customer development process – a term which is broadly used in technology start-up world.

I think it’s appropriate to use the term in the game business as well. Despite the fact that we are not looking for solid business model anymore. My experience shows that we – the game developers – are very good at coming up with novel ideas and the use of intuition and creativity overall. However, we have challenges to combine the creativity with a research-backed processes to uncover and validate customer needs and goals. More often than not, we tend to keep with our first great ideas and not caring about possible voices of disagreement and contradiction with our ideas. My quest is to uncover the myths around customer thinking and validation so that we could actually make better games and fully utilize the creative power of our minds. In the end, we all are here to create and offer awesome experiences and great games to players which could be remembered years after now. I hope that this framework helps at least few of you in that adventure.（source：Gamasutra）