作者：Brian’Psychochild’Green

几年前人们偶然发现了收集有关玩家的数据这一理念。一些MMO游戏开发者意识到他们可以收集有关玩家游戏方式的信息。毕竟所有玩家活动都将经过服务器的核实，所以记录这样的信息并将其储存起来以备之后使用是一个直接过程。

在那之后社交游戏便涌现了出来。受到已经收集了好几年参数的网站开发的推动，这一理念的执行变得更加容易了。为了最大限度地提高收益，开发者将衡量所有的一切参数并作出有关玩家真正想要什么的结论。

所以在现代游戏设计中参数发生了什么变化？让我们进一步分析。

metrics(from haotuishou)

工艺vs参数

Chris Bateman在自己写的一片文章(http://blog.ihobo.com/2016/07/the-craft-of-game-design-cannot-be-measured-by-any-metric.html)中讨论了参数在游戏设计中的角色。他认为游戏设计是一门工艺，而尝试着将其与参数联系在一起便是违背其本质含义。虽然他表示游戏设计师应该尝试着去理解玩家，但是他也表示并未看到参数的崛起。

Chris认同现代分析参数是专注于“分析现金流的漏洞并且是作为从玩家的数字钱包中吸金的一种数字捕食者。”他哀叹道，比起尝试着去了解玩家并创造出能够满足玩家需求和愿望的游戏，游戏设计工艺似乎已经被专注于利润这样的目标所取代了。游戏产业中的某些领域甚至还专注于通过参数去了解如何最大化游戏收益。

他的结论是，专注于收益将把游戏设计师变成比起创造有趣的体验，反而更倾向于追求利润的人。

艺术vs商业

从某种程度上看，这就好像将我们所熟悉的早前关于“艺术vs商业”的讨论重新搬上台面。较为极端的论点是艺术因为人们对于不义之财的追求而遭到了破坏。艺术家应该为了艺术而去创造艺术，而那些为了从自己的作品中获利的人是违反艺术的本质。换种说法来说便是，当你以商业目的去创造某件作品时，你便会在创造性方面做出让步，毕竟既符合创造性又能够满足公众的口味是几乎不可能的事。

说实话，我不认为Chris真的在提倡放弃资本主义并要求游戏开发者无偿劳作。在认真阅读了他的文章后我发现他提出了许多微妙的论点。但我认为我们最好能够透过早前的争论这一视角去看待他的文章。

我并不喜欢争论的专制性，反而我更喜欢那些更加细致入微的描述。作为一个具有创造性的人，我也喜欢食物，屋顶和空调等平常事物。但我认为能够意识到需要做出一个决定是件很重要的事。虽然我们可能会去崇拜那些敢于突破常规的独立开发者，但事实上我们也需要进一步去了解独立开发者们的真正目标。

乐趣vs利润

如果你看过我之前的博文可能会觉得这一讨论有点熟悉。那时我写的是有关社交游戏的内容并且主要侧重于参数。而今天我将专注于我关于Brenda Romero和Laralyn McWilliams有关参数与游戏设计的工艺之间的平衡讨论的评论。

我从中了解到的是，参数是游戏开发者的一种工具。不管是参数还是游戏设计工艺都能帮你创造出更棒的游戏。参数能够告诉你发生了什么，但却不能解释原因。所以你仍需要游戏设计工艺的帮助去理解玩家会这么做的原因。如果作为开发者的你不能深入理解游戏设计，你便会有“如果玩家重复某些内容，那就说明这些内容很有趣”的想法。

当然了，没有游戏设计师并不意味着失败。人们可能会偶然遇到一个优秀的游戏设计，而就像在传统的游戏产业中那样，复制游戏能够帮助你从玩家那赚到可观的收入。这是关于概率的游戏：如果你拥有知道如何提供给玩家有趣的体验而将其留在游戏中的设计师，你便更有可能获得成功。而只是通过参数去追求利润的话便只会赶走玩家，并可能导致新内容难以再延续最初的成功。据说大多数依赖于参数去获取盈利的社交游戏都在勉强挣扎着，并且很少有这样的游戏能够多次获得成功。

再一次地，优秀的游戏设计师不应该因为不能有效使用参数而将其抛弃。设计师应该使用参数去帮助自己更好地理解玩家的行动从而进一步理解为什么玩家会在自己的游戏中做出这样的选择。使用数据去最大化游戏设计工艺将能够进一步突显优秀游戏设计的优势。

参数vs未来

参数的范围很广，可以是一个疯狂的理念也可以是现代游戏的基础。它不仅能够让局外人了解到自己的威力，同时也能让资深游戏设计师理解如何有效使用这一工具。Chris Bateman便说道，虽然参数一度遭到滥用，但是游戏设计师需要真正意识到参数是能够提供给他们有用信息的重要工具。它能够贯穿玩家所说的自己想要的内容以及他们在游戏中的真正表现。当然了你还需要优秀的社区管理，因为那些敢于说出自己心声的人更有可能成为你想要将其留下的游戏支持者，即使他们的需求并不能代表全部玩家。

（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）

The purpose of metrics in a game

by Brian’Psychochild’ Green

Years ago people stumbled across the idea of gathering data about players. A few MMO developers realized they could gather information about what players were actually doing. After all, all player activities had to be verified by the server, so recording that information and storing it for later was a direct process.

Then social network games sprang on the scene. Driven by web development which had been collecting metrics for years, this idea became a no-brainer. Measure everything and draw all sorts of conclusions about what the players really want, with an eye toward maximizing revenues.

So, what has happened to metrics in modern game design? Let’s take a look.

Craft vs. Metrics

Chris Bateman wrote a blog post (http://blog.ihobo.com/2016/07/the-craft-of-game-design-cannot-be-measured-by-any-metric.html) where he talks about the role of metrics in game design. His thesis is that game design is a craft, and trying to define and confine it with metrics misses the point. While he predicted that game designers should try to understand players, he says that he didn’t quite see the rise of metrics.

Chris argues that modern analytic metrics are focus on “analysing where the leaks are in their cashflow, and acting as digital predators to suck spare change out of players’ digital wallets.” He laments that instead of trying to understand the player and deliver a game that meets the player’s needs and desires, a focus on profit has displaced the craft of game design. Some parts of the game industry has replaced a need to understand the players with an focus on understanding how to maximize income for a game.

His conclusion is that this focus on profit has turned what game designers do into less of a craft of creating joyful experiences and more like a soulless pursuit of profit.

Art vs. commerce

In a way, this argument can be seen as a rehash of the old “art vs. commerce” debate. The extreme version of the argument goes that art is polluted by the pursuit of filthy lucre. An artist should create art for the sake of art, and sellouts are those that profit from their work. A more moderate take is that when you do creative work with a commercial focus, you have to compromise on creativity; it’s incredibly difficult if not impossible to both be creatively unrestrained and serve the tastes of the public.

To be clear, I don’t think Chris is really advocating abandoning capitalism and demanding game developers give away their labor for free. Definitely go read his post, as I think he brings up a lot of nuanced arguments. But, I think it is useful to look at his post through the lens of this old debate.

I dislike the absolutist nature of the argument, and prefer the more nuanced version. As a creative person, I still like things like food, a roof, and perhaps air conditioning when the temperature and humidity get high outside. But, I think it is important to realize that there is a decision to be made. One can choose to pure creative energy to create experiences on one extreme, pandering to tastes and maximizing for profit on the other, and a lot of room between the two extremes. And, as much as we might lionize the indie iconoclasts, the reality is that sometimes it takes a lot of work and understanding what people actually want to survive as an indie.

Fun vs. profit

This discussion might seem a bit familiar if you’ve read my blog for a while. I wrote about social games and the focus on metrics before. I’ll draw particular attention to a comment I left later pointing to a talk given by Brenda Romero (née Brathwaite) and Laralyn McWilliams about the balance between metrics and the craft of game design. (Note this is the same Laralyn that Chris references in his post, quoting how she grew disillusioned with “designing for ‘friction’”.)

The lesson here is that metrics are another tool for a game developer. You don’t have the binary condition of either metrics or the craft of game design, but they can both work to build better games. Metrics tell you what is happening, but can’t explain why. It still takes the craft of game design to understand the reasons why players do what they do. Otherwise you get quotes like I put in the blog post, where the people running games have a shallow understanding of game design and think, “if a player repeats something, it’s fun.”

Of course, not having game designers isn’t a sure recipe for failure. People can stumble across good game design, and just as with the traditional game industry, cloning games can get you quite a bit of income from the game playing audience. It’s a game of probabilities: you’re more likely to succeed in the long term if you have someone who knows how to retain players by giving them a joyful experience. The single-minded pursuit of profit via metrics is more likely to turn people off, and can make it harder to follow up an initial success with another one. It’s telling that most social games that focused on metrics are floundering and few companies were able to have more than one notable success (outside of acquiring other companies).

But, again, a good game designer shouldn’t discard metrics just because they can be used poorly. Using metrics to help you understand what players are doing so you can start to understand why players do what they do in your game is too good to ignore. Augmenting the craft of game design with data strengthens the power of good game design.

Metrics vs. the future

Ever so quietly, metrics went from a crazy idea to the foundation of some of modern games. It took some outsiders to really show the power of metrics, but it will take experienced game designers to understand how best to use this tool. Chris Bateman is right in saying that metrics have been abused for a while, but game designers need to realize that metrics are a good tool that provide useful information. It can cut through the haze of what players say they want (or, at least, what a vocal minority say they want) compared to what players actually behave while playing. Of course, you still need good community management because those vocal people are likely big supporters of your game that you want to keep happy, even if their demands happen to be in the minority.（source：Gamasutra）