F2P模式的反馈回路会对“付费赢”设计产生什么影响？

原文作者： Josh Bycer  译者： Megan Shieh

我们之前已经讨论过“反馈回路”这个东西，也说明了它可以激励玩家继续玩某款游戏。F2P目前极受欢迎，开发者们也开始学会利用反馈回路来确保玩家花钱。在今天的文章中，我们将会讨论“为什么F2P的反馈回路会起作用”以及“它对会对游戏的平衡造成什么危害”。

什么是反馈回路？

在电子游戏中，最常见的例子是“正反馈回路”：创建一套可重复的动作，玩家通过重复这套动作来进阶。最简单、最有效的正反馈回路之一是ARPG（动作角色扮演类游戏）回路：对抗怪兽 -> 获得战利品 -> 变得更强。

Ultima Online(from mmorpg.com)

“负反馈回路” 的作用是降低正反馈回路的效用，使其处于受控状态。在电子游戏中，如若负反馈回路太强，就会形成一个恶性循环，进阶会变得越来越难，最终逼走玩家。

F2P游戏的目标并非创造负反馈回路，而是利用正反馈回路来吸引玩家花钱。

强者越强

对于任何F2P游戏而言，能够把免费玩家转化为付费玩家是一件很不容易的事。一旦为它花了钱，玩家就很难放弃这款游戏。F2P模式的反馈回路在带有竞争元素或PVP模式的游戏中最为常见，而且这些反馈回路都是围绕着“取得进阶，进而赢得战斗”而构建的。

这类游戏中的绝大多数都包含以下场景：

首先，游戏只会在你获胜的时候才给你奖励，而不是参与了就有奖励。如果你打了10场比赛，但只赢了2场，那么另外8场比赛就等于是浪费了你的时间。

下一步是引入建立在“赢得X场比赛”之上的每日任务或频繁给出的任务，完成这些任务的奖励通常是有限制的；有些游戏允许你花（可以用真钱买到的）游戏内货币来增加所得奖励。与普通获胜相比，完成这些任务总能让你收获更多奖励。

最后，游戏中会有一个排位制PVP模式。玩家在排行榜上爬得越高，在赛事结束时获得的奖励就会越多。除了限时赛事活动之外，季度赛提供的奖励最好。

这些选项的终极目标很简单：使获胜等同于进阶。一旦玩家开始在游戏中获胜，所得的奖励就会使他们变得更强。我们现在可以将F2P模式的反馈回路定义为：

在对战中获胜 -> 赢得奖励 -> 变得更强

不过对于大多数玩家而言，启动这个反馈回路的方法是“进行首次消费”。大多数情况下，付费玩家之所以能够击败免费玩家，仅仅是因为战况对前者更有利。获胜的次数越多，赢得的奖励也越多，奖励越多进阶就越快，等级越高就越容易赢…“富人越富”的法则正好适用于这些游戏。

也正是因为如此，我觉得与F2P游戏相关的联赛或电竞联赛不是很靠谱。的确，参赛者现在可能没有花钱，但你敢说他们从来没在这款游戏中花过钱？再强调一次，一旦某人达到了几乎所向披靡的地步，他们就不用再砸钱了，因为接连不断的胜利取代了花钱的需要。

你可能在想：“如果获胜会提供奖励，那你怎么让常胜者继续砸钱？”

答案是：将所有常胜者都聚集到一起。

终极比拼

正如之前提到的，一旦人们进入了F2P的反馈回路，他们就会开始超越其他玩家，尤其是那些不付费的玩家。最终，所有顶级玩家都会集中在排位赛或季赛中。这种时候，玩家间的力量悬殊就变小了，因为每个人手上都集齐了最好的卡牌或选项。

对于像CCG（收集式卡牌）这种有固定选项的游戏而言，这才是竞争真正开始的地方。游戏不再是关于“收集卡牌来打败其他玩家”，而是准确利用手上的卡牌来建立一组最强卡组。例如，《巫师之昆特牌（Gwent）》中就有一个普通排位赛和一个专供高手挑战的“职业天梯排位赛”。

对于这些玩家而言，花钱的诱惑力几乎消失了。他们在日常比赛中囤积的奖励，足以帮助他们获得任何想要的新（推出）卡牌。就是因为这样，所以与其他类游戏相比，CCG不常因为其游戏内F2P经济体系而受到抨击。因为最终，玩家可以免费获得所需的卡牌。

然而如果是基于Gacha的进阶，情况就有些不同了。因为物品可以通过升级而变得更强大，仅仅是拥有最好的卡牌/角色是不够的。这时，装备的比拼就会持续上演，因为玩家们会想通过升级物品来取得微弱的领先优势。在这种情况下，等级就没有上限了，因为只要玩家有变强的需求，开发者们就能加高卡牌的级别上限或推出全新的卡牌来吸引玩家继续比拼；砸钱的需要也会随之不断提升。

时间与金钱一样重要

这样看来，我们总共有三群玩家在玩这款游戏：处于中低级别的免费玩家、花钱达到中高级别的付费玩家、争取最高排位的顶级玩家。

花钱达到顶点的人越多，游戏的付费墙就越稳固。一旦这种情况发生，开发者很难激励其他玩家继续玩下去，因为这些玩家知道除非自己开始砸钱，不然过不了这个点。

解决这一问题的方案有两种，第一种很简单：不要把“Power（获胜捷径）”卖给玩家。

但如果非得卖，那么你就必须为免费玩家提供一个进阶的机会。允许玩家通过简单地参与比赛来获得奖励；同时给赢家更多奖励。关键是除了赢家之外，你也得考虑输家的感受，不应该让任何人觉得自己是在浪费时间。就像之前说过的，当玩家意识到自己在被迫花钱时，他们就会离开你的游戏。

如果想要人们继续玩你的游戏，你就不止得尊重金钱，还得尊重玩家花在你游戏里的时间，因为两者一样重要。

很多时候我觉得，有些F2P设计师眼里似乎只有短期利益和付费买“Power”。但你必须为所有玩家都提供选项，这样游戏社区才会健康。

本文由游戏邦编译，转载请注明来源，或咨询微信zhengjintiao

We’ve talked about feedback loops before and how powerful they are to motivate someone to keep playing a game. Given their popularity, the F2P genre has been making use of their own feedback loop to ensnare people into spending money. For today’s post, we’re going to talk about why this works and the harm it can do to game balance.

What is a Feedback Loop?

As always, let’s begin by defining feedback loops (for more, you can watch the video linked below).

The most popular example of feedback loops in video games are positive feedback loops: Which provide a repeatable set of actions that create progress within the game. One of the simplest and effective positive feedback loops is the ARPG cycle: Fight Monsters: Get Loot: Become Stronger.

A negative feedback loop is designed to reduce the effectiveness of the positive one to keep it in check. In video games, if the negative feedback is too strong, it can create a downward spiral where continuing grows harder and harder until the player stops.

For F2P games, they’re not about creating negative feedback, but exploiting positive to get people to spend.

Power to the Winners:

Converting a free player to a paying one is a big deal for any F2P game. Once there is that investment, it becomes harder for that person to quit playing. The F2P feedback loop is best seen in competitive or PVP-based systems, and is built around tying progress to winning.

You will see the following in some way, shape, or form in most of these titles. First, the game will only provide rewards when you win, not play the game. If you played 10 matches and only win 2, then you have wasted the time spent playing the other 8.

The next step is to introduce daily or frequent goals built on winning X matches. These rewards usually have a limit; some games allow you to spend premium currency to add more. You will always get more for completing these goals compared to just winning matches over the course of a day.

And then the final step is to have a ranked/ladder-based PVP mode. The higher the player goes in the ladder will provide them with more rewards at the end of the event. Season play provides the best rewards in the game outside of limited time events.

Ultimately the goal of these options is simple: Equate winning with progress. Once a player starts winning at the game, the rewards they earn will carry them. We can now define the F2P Feedback Loop as:

Win Matches: Earn Rewards: Get Stronger

However, the only way to start that feedback loop for most players is to make that initial purchase. In most cases, a paying player will be able to beat a non-playing one simply due to the abstraction being in their favor. “The rich getting richer” applies to these games, thanks to the rewards earned.

This is why I find talks about tournament or Esports-level discussions on F2P games questionable. Yes, the contestants may not have spent money on their options now, but I want to know what they spent lifetime-wise on that game. Again, once someone has reached the point where they are reliably winning most of their matches, those wins will replace the need to spend money.

I know what some of you are thinking right now: “If winning provides rewards, how do you continue to get money from winners?” And the answer is what happens when all those winners are all grouped together.

The End Game Arms Race:

As we’ve said, once people are in the F2P feedback loop, they will begin surging ahead of the other players; specifically the non-paying ones. At some point all the top players will be put together at the end of the ladder/season play. Now, the difference in power between the players begins to shorten, because everyone has access to the best cards/options.

For games that have fixed options like CCGs, this is where the competitive aspect really takes off. It’s no longer about hunting for cards to beat players, but about using what’s there to build the best decks. In Gwent for instance, there is both a regular ladder and a “Pro” ladder for high-ranked players.

For these players, the allure to spend money is pretty much gone. Any new cards added should be easily obtained by hoarding the rewards they win from their daily matches. This is why CCG titles aren’t as bashed for their F2P economies compared to other games. Eventually, you should have the cards you need and will not have to spend money.

However, when we’re talking about gacha-based progression, things go a bit differently. Because options can be leveled up to become more powerful, just having the best cards/characters is not enough. This is where the arms race continues, as players fight for micro leads by leveling up their options. The level cap can be extended indefinitely; along with the requirements to keep going up.

What ends up happening is that we have three groups of people playing the game: Free players who are in the lower to middle tier, those who spend to reach the middle to high tier, and the top players at the highest point jockeying for position.

The more people who spend money to reach the top, the more of a pay wall becomes established for the game. And once that happens, it becomes very hard to keep someone motivated to play when they know they have no way to get past that point unless they open up their wallet.

Consolation Prize:

Fighting against this issue has a very short answer and a longer one. The easiest way is obvious: Don’t sell power to the player. If you are going to go that route, either by choice or forced by a publisher, then you must provide free players a chance to progress. Time should matter when it comes to rewarding the player.

Allow players to earn a pack or get rewards by simply playing matches; with greater rewards for those who win. The point is that no one should feel like they’re wasting their time unless they win. As we’ve talked about before, when the player realizes that they’re being forced to spend money, they’re going to leave the game.

Time and Money are equally important to consider, and you must respect both if you expect people to keep playing your game.

Winner, Winner:

Too often it feels like F2P designers are only focusing on the short-term gain of whales and paying for power. If you want a healthy community for your game, then you must provide options to all the players. （Source: gamasutra.com  ）