开发者探讨Saga地图对益智手游的适用性

原作者：Dylan Woodbury 译者：Willow Wu

在10年代早期，像King的《糖果传奇》（2012）这样的现象级益智游戏表现出了F2P休闲手游不可小觑的盈利潜力。这些游戏所使用的盈利策略成为了后续新一波休闲手游的蓝图，也就是所谓的“saga地图”模式——就像《糖果传奇》中的那个线性关卡地图，玩家一关关玩过去。在闯关的过程中，玩家的连胜体验时不时会被一些困难关卡所打断，这些关卡旨在说服玩家花钱回到之前那种的一路连赢的畅快状态。

近十年过去了，saga地图在某些手游类型中得到广泛应用，尤其是休闲益智类。事实证明，这个设计公式让早期的游戏产品受益匪浅，特别是三消游戏类，甚至让人产生了saga地图就是手游设计标准配置的错觉。虽说sega地图对某些游戏类型来说是相当给力的盈利工具，但也有一些游戏因为开发者过度依赖这个进阶系统导致游戏表现大打折扣。

想要让sega地图进阶系统获得成功，你需要搭配适合的游戏系统——要能让玩家欣然地接受被卡住的状态。如果开发者不能激励玩家反复挑战同一关卡、让玩家愈挫愈勇，那么pinch level自然也就发挥不出作用了。没有那些锲而不舍的玩家，那些困难关卡很快就会惹怒越来越多人，最后抛弃游戏。玩家数量减少，玩家设计师就不得不降低pinch level的难度，而游戏的盈利机会也大大减少。就比如说三消游戏，它们很擅长说服玩家重复挑战关卡，开发者能创造出难度够高的pinch level刺激玩家消费，但同时又不会劝退太多玩家。其它游戏类型，比如泡泡射击，它的技巧要求比三消游戏更高，多数玩家在连续失败后就会放弃了，因此saga地图并不适合泡泡射击游戏。

摘要

首先，我将通过剖析三消游戏的用户体验来总结适合使用saga地图的游戏玩法。接着，通过分析运用saga地图的泡泡射击游戏的失败，总结开发者不宜在什么样的游戏中使用saga地图。最后，我将分享近期为我的新泡泡射击游戏Emoji Pop设计的原创进阶系统（https://playemojipop.com）。我希望这篇文章能够帮助开发者们在sega地图方面作出明智的决策。除此之外，我还希望开发者们能够针对其游戏体验的巧妙之处和特殊需求量身打造进阶系统，而不是盲目地跟随市场趋势，期望能和别人一样获得成功。

三消游戏的魅力

这种要求玩家跟彩色元素互动、进行配对的游戏玩法其实在《糖果传奇》问世多年以前就已经风靡起来了。PopCap 2001年发行了《宝石迷阵》，游戏销售超过1000万份，下载量达到1.5亿。游戏玩法简单而有趣，对大众很有吸引力，但同时游戏的动态设计又能让玩家感觉到自己的每个战略选择都相当关键。

三消游戏玩法对休闲玩家来说是完美的，不仅仅是因为玩法直观，还因为这类游戏在运气和技巧之间实现了平衡。三消游戏很大程度是跟运气挂钩的，完成每一步之后面板上都会掉落随机的彩色配对元素。运气好的话，大片相同的元素会配对形成强化道具，让胜利触手可及。就算是《糖果传奇》中的某个高难度关卡，玩家们也坚信运气终将会到来，帮助他们渡过难关。可以说这款游戏本质上就是一个带有战略选择的老虎机。所有这一切塑造出了一种吸引力十足且留存率极高的游戏体验。

Candy Crush Saga（from pocketgamer.biz）

除了运气成分，技能需求也是关卡具备高重玩性的原因之一。每次失败后，玩家无法确定这到底是因为运气不好造成的还是自己的战略选择出错。这种不确定的感觉要归功于运气与技巧的平衡展现，让玩家觉得就算失败也是公平的（即使事实并非如此），这进一步增加了观众对失败的心理阈限。

三消游戏玩法与saga地图：天作之合

通过分析三消游戏体验中运气&技能平衡的影响，大家就可以看出为什么这类游戏搭配saga地图的效果如此之好。Saga地图的出现意味着玩家可能需要重复玩一个关卡几十次。

考虑到运气因素，很多三消玩家并不介意花钱过关。即使是超高难度的关卡，玩家们也是很有信心的，因为他们知道自己最终会迎来非常幸运的一回合，所以花钱买强化道具对他们来说感觉更公平。购买道具在这些三消玩家看来是一种节省时间的方式，而不是逼着玩家花钱的可怕付费墙。所以他们对游戏中的行动召唤是抱着较为积极的看法，而且之后可能会重复购买，因为他们并不感觉这是什么耍手段的行为。他们是自愿花钱的，不是因为游戏强迫他们花钱，而是因为游戏训练他们理解和接受的运气的存在。

不同休闲益智游戏玩家的熟练度和游戏体验是各不相同的，因此运气的存在能够让不同技能水平的休闲玩家在同一个saga地图上享受到同样的乐趣。初级玩家不擅长做出合适决策，但只要运气好最终还是能过关的。高级玩家在玩早期那些比较容易的关卡时会争取一次过，但时不时还会因为运气不好而失败。这样就可以防止他们感到枯燥。不管是新手还是老手，都能通过不同的方式沉浸于同样的关卡地图中，对于游戏设计者来说，在构建这一系列关卡时无疑是轻松了不少，它们及能吸引玩家又能带来可观的收益。

这就是三消游戏留存效果这么好的主要原因，还有为什么它们跟saga地图搭配后能够大幅度提升吸金能力。但是saga地图并不适合所有的益智手游。

为什么saga地图会对泡泡射击游戏造成负面影响？

泡泡射击游戏在三消游戏崛起的同期也显示出了成功的迹象。比如King的Bubble Witch（2011）、Panda Pop（2013）这些游戏，玩家需要射击彩色泡泡以完成配对。在游戏经验不怎么丰富的玩家看来，泡泡射击和三消的玩法是非常相似的，都是想办法配对三个以上的同色元素，对吧？然而，射击玩法的特性导致其游戏体验与三消完全不同。

要说相似性，我认为泡泡射击与经典街机游戏更靠近，就比如早年的备受欢迎的鼻祖游戏《泡泡龙》（1994）。这类游戏跟早期2D射击街机游戏有着共同的基因。尤其是随着休闲受众逐渐成熟化，我们希望层次更深但依然保持休闲特性的泡泡射击游戏能够掀起一波新的手游热潮。然而，现实是我们一直都没等到，泡泡射击游戏的收益跟三消游戏完全没有可比性。

我认为泡泡射击游戏没有在市场中溅起大水花的主要原因是他们选错了路，照搬了被三消游戏标准化的saga地图配置。尽管三消游戏实现了技巧和运气的平衡，但泡泡射手本质上是以技巧为基础的，生生套上saga地图会引发很多问题。

泡泡射击游戏需要玩家瞄准、发射彩色泡泡，这比三消中简单地点击或交换随机颜色的元素更复杂、更有技巧性。虽然三消游戏中运气的好坏一直都是由掉落下来的元素所决定的，但泡泡射击游戏的关卡并不像老虎机，更像是一个静态的谜题，玩家需要慢慢学习最佳策略。

泡泡射击游戏的玩法本来就比三消更难理解。任务目标即使对初学者来说也一目了然（例如：清除30个黄色元素），但泡泡射手中的玩法会更复杂。玩家们需要明白越高的泡泡越有价值，因为打落它们下面的泡泡也会跟着一起掉落，从而节省步数。但这对于那些被下面好打的泡泡所吸引的玩家来说，他们会采用完全相反的策略。泡泡射击游戏的胜利条件——比如清除特殊的泡泡，也很难确保让玩家注意到，因为大部分玩家都是直接射击，一路攀到顶，根本不顾及胜利条件是什么。带着这样的粗暴玩法一路下来，玩家自然也就不会去注意目标了。泡泡射击游戏的胜利条件五花八门，跟三消游戏完全不一样。

光是瞄准&射击的机制，就足以让休闲玩家的成功率明显降低。玩家必须瞄准位置、稳定发射，对于那些不怎么玩游戏的人来说，这是一个有技术门槛的任务。操控方面也很难让玩家完全明白，因为泡泡射击游戏的操作方式多种多样，各有利弊。有些玩家会忘记他们可以通过拖动瞄准目标，而不是通过快速触击屏幕这种费力的方式，这样他们的过关几率也会降低。在有些游戏中，玩家可以像玩弹弓那样拉泡泡，有些游戏则希望玩家跟游戏中的空余地方互动，通过这种方式瞄准目标。这是反直觉的，特别是对于没有多少游戏经验的玩家来说。在操作和策略方面犯难，促使这些玩家认为泡泡射击游戏的技巧要求比想象中的还要高。

正是这些原因导致玩家过不了关、引发挫败感，但这还只是其中一部分。虽然有些玩家能够接受在三消游戏中反复挑战同一关卡，但是在泡泡射击游戏中，通常尝试几次失败后，很多休闲玩家就会被惹恼了。“不可能过关的！”“这游戏太坑人了！”“我觉得自己太蠢了。”玩家纷纷说道。技巧在泡泡射击游戏中占据着主导地位，玩家们因此卡关，有时甚至不知道自己在哪里出了错。

King公司就发现了这些问题。King试图将运气元素注入到他们的游戏Bubble Witch Saga 3中，通过随机种子和大量的游戏测试打造玩法、难度各不相同的关卡。这就意味着同样的关卡每次玩的时候都不一样，有时候玩家很轻松就能过关了，但他们往往都没有意识到这一点——至少在一段时间内。King还在Bubble Witch Saga 3中加入了“小精灵”（Fairies）这样的障碍物，它们会随机破坏界面中的元素，玩家可能会因此愿意重复挑战这一关卡，希望消除障碍物能起到帮助作用，最终过关。像Wooga的Bubble Island 2（2016）和Jam City的Snoopy Pop（2017）等游戏都把基于物理学的设计当做卖点，摇来晃去的泡泡增加了游戏的不确定性，提升了关卡的可重玩性。尽管开发者们努力将泡泡射击游戏的天平向运气那端倾斜，但他们还是没能创造出三消游戏那种引人入胜的游戏体验。这表明了注重技能是泡泡射击游戏的固有特点，不是注入随机元素就可以掩盖的。

事实上，玩家对泡泡射击游戏中的随机元素也抱着消极态度，但是他们表示在三消游戏中就可以接受。举个例子，游戏中随机给的彩色“泡弹”，如果在最后一步，玩家需要一个红色泡泡才能赢得胜利，但是随机给的是蓝色，他可能会觉得被耍了，以致于直接放弃游戏。“我本来会赢的！这游戏耍我！”他会这样想。然而如果是一个三消游戏，最后落下来的元素不是玩家想要的，他可能会欣然接受，对失败没有异议。“我本来能做得更好，”他会这么想。泡泡射击游戏的玩家们之所以对随机元素导致失败这种情况相当反感，是因为这实际上打破了他们的幻觉——他们认为自己在绝大多数情况下是依靠技巧通关的，而三消游戏的玩家一般不会这么想，因为他们已经接受了运气在游戏中扮演的强大而积极的角色。

对技能要求较高的泡泡射击游戏在搭配saga地图进阶系统时，会引发一些严重的、无法解决的问题。由于运气比重较小，玩家并不会抱着乐观的态度去挑战困难关卡，而那些不知道怎么玩才能取得更好成绩的玩家，要么觉得自己不够聪明，要么就是觉得游戏根本就是在欺骗自己。休闲玩家在卡关后很快就会失去耐心。现代泡泡射击游戏关卡设计师的任务通常就是一个saga地图+一系列关卡——这些关卡要足够简单，可以防止技能水准较低的玩家大量退出，但又需具备一定的难度，让很多玩家相信他们应该花钱继续闯关。然而这在靠技能进阶的游戏中是无法实现的，就比如泡泡射击。

很多开发工作室从早期阶段就在想办法努力解决这个问题，但却从未尝试过删除saga地图——这似乎才是问题的根源。在深入分析泡泡射击游戏的核心玩法、并确定了玩家想要的是一种不完全封锁他们前进道路的进阶系统之后，我精心设计了一套全新的进阶模式和盈利策略，有望将这一类型的游戏提升到新的高度。

Emoji Pop——我为泡泡射击游戏量身打造了进阶系统

认识到以技巧为主的泡泡射击游戏跟saga地图的契合度很低之后，我开始为这个类型的游戏寻找一个替代进阶系统。这种新模式最重要的限制条件是不能长期地把玩家挡在一个地方，但由此也引入了一个问题：那就是如何才能说服玩家偶尔付费以获得一定的游戏优势，或者看看广告，这在玩家没有被墙堵在外面的情况下是很难做到的。

我必须先思考一堆潜在的解决方案，分析利弊，然后选出一个最佳的。我曾经在别的游戏上看到一些方法，比如把saga地图改成分支地图。这就意味着如果玩家多次在同一关卡栽跟头，他们可以去玩另一边的关卡，避免身心俱彼直接退出游戏。然而，这就严重削弱了游戏中的行动召唤。玩家会直接转向另一个关卡，极少数人会想到花钱。“我至少能打过其中一关吧，”玩家会这么想。他们只有在多个关卡都遭遇失败后才会去考虑花钱，但或许这时候他们也在考虑抛弃游戏。如果他们真的决定在某个关卡上花钱，那其它分支上过不去的关卡还是把那一整条路都封死了，过不了多久他们可能又得把手伸进钱包里了。

我想跳出框架来构思一个新系统，能够让人觉得它与泡泡射击游戏无比契合。我希望这种进阶系统就像是一系列任务，本身就像是一个游戏。它应该是由玩法衍生而来的。当玩家打开Emoji Pop时，我不想把什么蠢兮兮的地图呈现在他们眼前，我想让他们立即沉浸在游戏中。

我想到的其中一个关键概念是连续游戏。想象一个超级长的关卡，玩家需要分多次进度才能玩完。相比限制玩家的过关尝试次数，我限制的是玩家步数，用完之后玩家就不得不等待步数缓慢恢复。这个系统可以防止进阶完全被封锁，同时也可以让玩家立刻沉浸在游戏中。

现代泡泡射击的玩家有时会害怕回到游戏中去，害怕面对上一次让他们愤怒退出的那个关卡，而这种无缝衔接的关卡结构能够促使玩家们又回到游戏中去完成已经开始的核心任务。没有定期回到游戏中意味着会失去潜在的进度。这种连续的玩法可以应用到很多益智手游中，替代原有的关卡链结构。这种方法跟那些应用《宝石迷阵》模式的游戏有些类似——比如Jam City的《迪士尼表情包大作战》，一款通过连续任务进阶的三消游戏。

玩家在无缝切换的世界中不断配对，其实这就等同于进阶。这种进阶系统契合了泡泡射击游戏的玩法，凸显出了瞄准&射击的主导地位，而saga地图中，进阶系统给人的感觉像是与核心玩法无关。让进阶系统本身契合玩法，在展现游戏玩法的同时让玩家感觉到进阶是确实存在并挺重要的。

然而，Emoji Pop的连续关卡本身并不能带来显著的盈利效果。除了扩展连续关卡这个长期目标，我还需要给玩家提供更多的即时挑战——也就是我作为开发者设计的高难度关卡，为的是给玩家施加压力，让他们采取行动。我想出了迷你关卡的点子，玩家可以通过收集分散在普通连续关卡中的星星来解锁。在迷你关卡中取胜，玩家就能赢得丰厚的奖励，帮助他们更轻松地通过我设定为“世界”的连续关卡，但如果他们失败了，迷你关卡就会和奖励一起消失。

当玩家在迷你关卡中获胜时，他可以使用老虎机，争取非常有价值的奖励。奖励就是一定数量的步数，步数越多，玩家在世界中就可以走得更远。所以通过在迷你关卡中取胜，玩家就可以继续在世界中不断进阶，然后遇到下一个迷你关卡，也就是获取更多步数的机会，再继续探索更远的世界，以此类推。正是这种奖励循环让玩家们意识到在关卡中获胜是非常重要的，从而鼓励玩家花钱或者看广告以获得更多的尝试机会（也就是生命）或者赚取强化道具，让关卡难度降低。

为了将高难度关卡的作用发挥到极致，我在玩法核心中加入了“连胜”机制，提升了通关的价值。连胜关卡越多，奖励就越丰厚。那些习惯了连胜奖励的玩家是不愿意让这些东西轻易流走的，这意味着他们遇上高难度关卡可能会不顾一切拿下胜利，开发者的目的也就达成了。虽然很多热门休闲益智游戏都会时不时地推出连胜活动，但Emoji Pop却将这一系统的价值发挥到了极致，融入到游戏的核心部分。

在我砍掉困扰了泡泡射击游戏十年之久的saga地图后，我意识到这类游戏存在很多疯狂的可能性，只是因为其技巧为主的本质一直被压制着。通过设置临时性关卡，我不必像其他泡泡射击游戏开发者一样对复杂度和难度避而不谈，他们总是偏执地认为数千个关卡中某一个关卡可能会被认为太难，从而把成千上万的玩家逼走。

与其它泡泡射击游戏不同的是，Emoji Pop具有吸引力十足的新机制和模式。在大多数现代泡泡射击游戏中，玩家必须要打过数百个关卡，才能看到一些普通玩家可能会觉得很有吸引力的东西，而Emoji Pop的玩家在游戏的第一个小时内就会接触到几个复杂元素。其中的一个例子就是匕首表情符号，它会持续旋转，所以玩家必须要把握好出手的时机。目前我正在探索数十种建立在时机、灵巧度、策略基础上的更为复杂的机制和游戏模式，这很对玩家的胃口，部分原因是在我的游戏中挑战失败并不会导致全面封锁进阶。泡泡射击游戏的技能需求是很多玩家对它感兴趣的原因之一，所以Emoji Pop才会比之前其它的泡泡射击游戏更具有吸引力。

虽然Emoji Pop的进阶系统并不具备封锁墙式高难度关卡的优势，但它却能通过其它方式激励玩家花钱或看广告。连续关卡+分散式的迷你关卡结构，再加上通过关卡所给予的随机奖励，形成了一种具有高度不确定性的刺激游戏体验。有时你打开游戏，一上来就被卡关，然后你就无事可做了，这时候可能才过了一分钟。而其它时候，你可能会赢下关卡、连胜，玩了很久。我相信这种多变性是健康的，玩家在体验过长时间连胜的感觉之后，遇上不如意游戏流程时就会有更强烈的坚持欲望，会更愿意花钱通关或者看广告获取更多步数。

到达每个连续关卡的顶端还可以解锁一个新的Emoji障碍物，为游戏增加一个有趣的新机制。玩家甚至可以用这些表情符号来创建自己的关卡，并与世界分享。我非常努力地通过各种方式来展现泡泡射击游戏的乐趣——不仅是跟进阶系统融合，同时也让玩家们自己去探索玩设计。我为他们提供了一系列的教程，让他们了解到这类游戏的真实设计原则、游戏是怎么展开的。如果玩家对泡泡射击游戏的玩法感兴趣了，那他们对游戏的潜在投入是非常值得期待的。除此之外，他们还很有可能分享关卡，促使原创关卡得到正式采用。这些铁杆玩家会转化成内容的创造者和游戏的免费营销员。

总结

像三消这样的游戏在运气和技巧之间取得了完美的平衡，关卡具有无限重玩的价值。这些游戏非常适合saga地图进阶系统，也就是说玩家在同一关卡上愈挫愈勇。然而，基于技能的游戏，就比如泡泡射击游戏，其关卡的重玩价值就没有那么高，尤其是对休闲玩家来说。因此，这些有技能需求的休闲游戏是不适合saga地图的，这个问题也无法通过加入随机元素来解决，

我们需要设计出新的进阶系统。总而言之，开发者们需要摒弃在休闲游戏圈中普遍存在的复制粘贴思维，要学会依据自己的游戏系统属性来定制meta系统。

通过解决这个严重困扰泡泡射击游戏的关键问题，我的游戏Emoji Pop展示出了新的可能性，它们在先前是很难被注意到的。泡泡射击游戏的开发者们以往总是会弱化技能在游戏中的地位，但由于Emoji Pop中的玩家不会被高难度的关卡堵住，所以我可以充分地利用技能元素，创造更多样化的内容。

一直以来，这些益智游戏开发者们不加思索地将saga地图直接套用在产品上，没有考虑自己的meta系统到底适不适合。问题是，这些mata系统才是手游的主要魅力所在，而不是核心玩法。试想一下，如果《糖果传奇》是几十年前发行于任天堂64平台的，玩家们会说：“这款游戏是挺有意思的，但似乎并不值得我耗那么多时间打那几千关。”手游玩家之所以会玩这些游戏就是因为它们的进阶系统，一关一关下来，在玩家枯燥的生活缝隙中注入了成就感，或者至少让他们有了追求动力。我们需要在这些系统上的设计创意上投入更多的精力，根据现有的游戏系统想出独创性的解决方案，让游戏玩法以新的方式发光发热。每种类型的游戏都有多个出色的解决方案，现在是时候发掘它们了！

本文由游戏邦编译，转载请注明来源，或咨询微信zhengjintiao

In the early 2010’s, casual mobile puzzle games like King’s groundbreaking “Candy Crush Saga” (2012) proved the profitability of free-to-play casual mobile games. The monetization strategy employed by games like this one served as the blueprint for a new wave of casual mobile games.

This blueprint is called the “saga-map” model, referring to the linear map of levels in games like “Candy Crush Saga” that players progress through one-by-one. While progressing through the game, players experience intervals of consistent progress punctuated by difficult “pinch” levels designed to convince players to spend money in order to return to the pleasant state of consistent progress.

Nearly a decade later, the saga-map is utilized almost universally in some genres of mobile games, particularly within the casual puzzle game space. The formula proved so successful for early adopters, particularly for Match-3 developers, that it cemented the delusion that the saga-map was somehow a part of the natural fabric of mobile game design. While the saga-map is an extremely effective monetization tool for some types of games, including Match-3s, there are other mobile game genres which have greatly underperformed due to developers’ overreliance on the inclusion of this progression system.

The saga-map system of progression succeeds only when paired with a gameplay system that convinces players to happily accept the state of being stuck. If developers can’t motivate players to repeatedly fail the same challenge, then level designers won’t be able to create effective “pinch” levels. Without a tenacious audience, these “pinch” levels will quickly frustrate many players to the point of rage-quitting. This dropoff of players would force level designers to make these “pinch” levels easier, dramatically reducing the profitability of the game.

Match-3 gameplay, for example, is excellent at convincing players to repeatedly play the same level, enabling level designers to create effective “pinch” levels that are difficult enough to convince players to spend money, but without scaring too many players away. Other genres like the Bubble Shooter, a more skill-based version of the Match-3, fail to motivate players to continue playing a level after repeated losses, and thus are a poor fit for the saga-map structure.

Thesis

First, I’ll first describe the gameplay conditions that warrant the employment of a saga-map by dissecting the Match-3 gameplay experience. Next, by analyzing the failures of saga-map-based Bubble Shooters, I’ll describe the gameplay conditions that should discourage developers from utilizing the saga-map structure. Finally, I’ll describe my recent experience designing an original system of progression for my new Bubble Shooter called Emoji Pop (https://playemojipop.com). I hope reading this will educate designers to make informed decisions regarding the use of saga-map progression. I also hope to encourage developers to craft progression models that address the nuances and special needs of their unique gameplay experience, as opposed to thoughtlessly mimicking market trends and hoping for the best, assuming their near-universal application.

The Appeal of Match-3s

The appeal of the Match-3 genre, which requires players interact with colored tiles in order to make matches, was proven long before “Candy Crush Saga”. PopCap’s “Bejeweled” was released in 2001 and sold 10 million copies, with 150 million downloads. Its gameplay was simplistic enough to appeal to the masses, yet nuanced enough to make the player feel like they were constantly making important strategic choices.

Match-3 gameplay is perfect for casual gamers, not only because of its instinctive gameplay, but also because of the perfect balance it strikes between chance and skill. Match-3’s are heavily based in chance due to the nature of the randomly-colored tiles falling after every turn. If lucky, large bunches of colors will form that result in powerups that initiate big-win moments. This potential for chancey big-win moments makes the game appear constantly in the balance between success and failure. Every move could be the move that sets the player up for victory. Even if a level in “Candy Crush” is difficult, the player is confident that they will eventually get lucky enough to win. The game is essentially a slot machine laced with strategic choices, all of which contributes to a deeply engaging and retentive experience.

In addition to the obvious element of chance, the delicate infusion of skill also contributes to the replayability of levels. Often after a loss, it isn’t clear whether the player was just unlucky, or if she could have made better strategic choices. This obscurity, a result of the balanced presence of chance and skill, makes losses feel fair, even when they aren’t, further increasing the audience’s threshold for failure.

Match-3 Gameplay and Saga-Maps: A Match Made in Heaven

By analyzing the effects of the chance/skill balance present in the Match-3 gameplay experience, one can see why these games perform so well when packaged with the saga-map, which requires players accept playing some levels potentially dozens of times.

Many Match-3 players don’t mind spending money in order to pass a level due to the chancey nature of Match-3s. Players are confident in their ability to eventually beat even tremendously difficult levels because they know they are bound to get a really lucky playthrough eventually, so spending money on boosters feels more fair to them. Players view transactions in Match-3s as a way to save time, as opposed to the dreaded “paywalls” that force players to spend money, so they view calls-to-action more positively, and are likely to repeat their purchases because they don’t feel burned or cheated from them. They are deciding to spend money voluntarily, not because the game is forcing them to, because the game has trained them to understand and embrace the strong presence of chance.

The dexterity and gaming experience of players of casual puzzle games varies greatly, so the strong presence of chance allows for casual gamers of all skill levels to enjoy the same sequence of levels along a saga-map. Low-skill players who make poor decisions can still eventually win with the right streak of luck. Highly skilled players, even those playing the earlier and easier levels, are motivated to beat every level on their first try, and still occasionally lose due to bad luck. This prevents the game from being boring to them. The ability for both gaming “noobs” and “veterans” to enjoy the same sequence of levels, in different ways, makes it a lot easier for game designers to construct a series of profitable and engaging levels.

These are some of the main reasons Match-3s are so good at hooking and retaining players, and why, when paired with a saga-map, they make so much money. But saga-maps aren’t always a good fit for mobile puzzle games.

Why Do Saga-Map Bubble Shooters Underperform?

Another genre of casual puzzle game, the Bubble Shooter, showed much promise on the mobile market at the same time Match-3s were taking off. Games like King’s “Bubble Witch” (2011) and Jam City’s “Panda Pop” (2013) task players with shooting colored bubbles in order to make matches. Bubble Shooter gameplay, to the untrained eye, appears to be very similar to the gameplay of Match-3s. They are both games about making colored matches of 3, right? However, the nature of the shooting mechanic transforms the experience into one that is essentially nothing like that of a Match-3.

Bubble Shooters have more in common with the gameplay of classic arcade games than Match-3s, with ancestors like Taito’s beloved “Puzzle Bobble” (1994). One could argue the genre even has some shared DNA with 2D shooting games that dominated the arcades. It was hoped that the deeper, yet still casual, gameplay of Bubble Shooters could launch its own wave of wildly successful mobile games, especially as the casual audience matured. However, that never happened, as Bubble Shooters gross closer to 100 million dollars annually compared to the several billions of dollars that Match-3’s make.

I believe the reason Bubble Shooters have failed to make a significant impact on the market is due to their misled embrace of the saga-map progression style standardized by Match-3 games. Whereas Match-3s strike an even balance between skill and chance, Bubble Shooters are inherently more skill-based, which causes all sorts of problems when a saga-map is slapped on top.

Bubble Shooters require that players aim and shoot colored bubbles, an inherently more complicated and skill-based mechanic than the simple tapping or swapping of randomly-colored tiles in Match-3s. While the element of chance in Match-3s is constant in the form of randomly falling tiles, levels in Bubble Shooters feel less like a slot machine and more like a static puzzle that players slowly learns the optimal solution of.

Bubble Shooter gameplay is inherently more difficult to understand than Match-3 gameplay. While the objectives of Match-3s are clear even to beginners (example: Clear 30 yellow tiles), the gameplay in Bubble Shooters is more complex. Players need to understand that higher-up matches are more valuable because they can drop matches below, thus saving moves, but that is counter-intuitive to many who are drawn to the easier-to-shoot matches below. The victory conditions of Bubble Shooters, like clearing special objective bubbles, are also more difficult to convey since players spend most of the level simply climbing towards the top without a need for considering the victory condition. It’s easy for players to forget the objective after ignoring it throughout most of the level. The victory conditions of Bubble Shooters still vary from game to game, unlike games in the Match-3 genre.

The aim-and-shoot mechanic alone is enough to reduce the ability for casual gamers to succeed. Players must precisely aim and steadily release their shot, a dexterous task for non-gamers. The controls are also difficult to communicate, as there are many control schemes present in the genre that all have their downsides. Some players forget they can drag to aim, and instead quickly tap on the screen to shoot, which hinders their success. Some games allow players to pull the bubble back like a slingshot, while others somehow expect their players to know to aim their shot by interacting with the blank and thus least attractive portion of the screen. This is counterintuitive, especially to an audience without much prior gaming experience This struggle with the controls and strategy makes these players perceive Bubble Shooter gameplay to be even more skill-based than experienced gamers can imagine.

These are just a few factors that contribute to the frustration of players who can’t figure out how to beat a level in order to continue progressing. Whereas some players accept playing levels in Match-3s dozens of times because of their “one more try” quality, after a few attempts playing a level in a Bubble Shooter, many casual players get upset. “It’s impossible!” some say. “The game screwed me!” some say. “I feel stupid,” others say. The strong role of skill in Bubble Shooters causes players to lose, sometimes without players knowing what they are even doing wrong.

Developers like King realize these problems with the Bubble Shooter Genre. King attempted to artificially inject chance into their game “Bubble Witch Saga 3” by relying on randomly seeded levels and massive playtesting efforts to craft levels with difficulty that varies playthrough-to-playthrough. This means the same level will be totally different each time, causing some playthroughs to be much easier, often without the player’s awareness, at least for a while. King also includes obstacles like Fairies that destroy random matches on the screen in “Bubble Witch 3”, which could encourage players to play levels repeatedly in hopes that these obstacles will eventually all work in the player’s favor and win them the game. Games like Wooga’s “Bubble Island 2” (2016) and Jam City’s “Snoopy Pop” (2017) touted physics-based modes, which elevated the inherent replayability of levels due to the chaotic nature of swinging bubbles. However, these efforts to tilt the balance of Bubble Shooters towards chance have failed to create an experience as engaging as Match-3s. This indicates that an emphasis of skill is inherent to the Bubble Shooter genre, not something that can be covered up with an infusion of randomness.

In fact, players actually respond negatively to random-based elements in Bubble Shooters that they would otherwise accept in Match-3s. For example, players in Bubble Shooters are given randomly colored bubbles to shoot. If on the last move of the game, the player requires a red bubble to win, but receives a blue, she is likely to feel cheated, and is likely to immediately quit the game. “I should have won, the game cheated me!” she’ll say. Yet if a Match-3 player loses due to a particularly unlucky drop of tiles, she’ll probably feel that she lost fairly. “I could have done a little bit better,” she’ll say. The reason players of Bubble Shooters react poorly when an element of chance is responsible for their failure is because it disrupts their illusion that their success in the game relies almost completely on their skill, a belief Match-3 players do not hold because they have been trained to accept the strong and active role of chance plays in the game.

This higher degree of skill present in Bubble Shooters causes critical and unsolvable problems when paired with a saga-map progression system. Because Bubble Shooters are interpreted as skill-based, casual players quickly become angered when they get stuck on a level. Due to the lack of chance, players feel less optimistic about their ability to eventually win a hard level, and those who aren’t sure how they could have performed better either feel that they are not smart enough to play the game, or that the game is simply cheating them. Modern Bubble Shooter level designers are tasked with creating a saga-map, a single chain of levels, which is easy enough to prevent less-skilled players from quitting in mass, yet hard enough to convince many players that they should spend money to continue progression. This is not possible with a gameplay system based in skill, as Bubble Shooters are.

Design studios have grappled with this problem with Bubble Shooters since their inception, and yet have never attempted to remove the saga-map structure that appears to be the root of the problem. After dissecting the core gameplay of Bubble Shooters and identifying the need for a progression system which pinches players without completely blocking their progress, I was able to craft a brand new model of progression and monetization strategy which promises to elevate the genre to new heights.

Emoji Pop: My Experience Crafting a Progression System Especially Made for Bubble Shooters

After recognizing that the skill-based nature of Bubble Shooters made them a very poor fit for the saga-map model, I began to search for an alternate system of progression for the genre. The most important constraint of this new model is that players’ progress could never be halted for an extended period of time, due to their adverse reaction to repeated failure. This constraint also introduced the problem of needing to find a way to convince players to occasionally pay for in-game advantages or to watch an advertisement, something that’s tough to do without walling off their progress.

There are many potential solutions which I had to consider before coming up with an optimal one. One solution I’ve seen other games attempt, for example, is to modify the saga-map structure with branching paths. This means players who are frustrated with a level can play another level, so are less likely to burn out. However, this greatly dilutes the calls-to-action. After a repeated loss, players would switch to another level, and would rarely consider spending money. “Surely I can beat one of these levels,” players would say. Only after going through the miserable experience of failing multiple levels will players consider spending money, but at that point they might already be ready to quit. If they did decide to spend money on a level, they would still be walled off on the other levels, and it wouldn’t be long before they’d have to spend money again.

I wanted to think outside of the box to concoct a system that would feel like a natural pairing with the gameplay of Bubble Shooters. I wanted the progression system to feel less like a list of tasks and more like a game itself. It should arise from the gameplay. When they opened Emoji Pop, I didn’t want them to see a stupid map, I wanted them to be immediately immersed in the game!

One important idea I had was the concept of continuous play. Imagine a really long level that would take multiple play sessions to complete. Instead of getting a limited number of attempts to beat a level, players would have a limited number of moves to play, after which they’d be forced to wait for them to regenerate. This system prevents players from ever getting permanently blocked, and also has the extra benefit immediately immersing players in the game.

Whereas players of modern Bubble Shooters sometimes dread returning to the game and the frustrating level that made them rage-quit last session, this structure of continuous levels hooks players into coming back in order to finish a core task that they had started. It gets them invested in a core task, and makes them come back to complete it. Not checking back regularly means the definite loss of potential progress. This concept of continuous play could be incorporated into many styles of mobile puzzle games as an alternative to the standard level-by-level structure. This approach is partially akin to the Bejeweled-esque strategy employed by games such as Jam City’s “Disney Emoji Blitz”, a Match-3 which shirks the level-by-level strategy in exchange for a consistent challenge full of ongoing tasks.

Making matches in the continuous worlds is equivalent to progress. This system of progress embraces Bubble Shooter gameplay and brings it to the forefront, whereas progress in saga-map games feels tangential to the core experience. By embracing the gameplay within the progression system itself, it makes progress feels more important and tangible to players, and it also showcases the gameplay and sends the signal that the developer is confident in its appeal, and so should the player.

However, Emoji Pop’s system of continuous levels does not incentivize significant monetization in itself. In addition to the long-term goal of scaling continuous levels, the player needs more immediate challenges that I as the developer could purpose as “pinch” points that pressure the player to take action. I came up with the idea of mini-levels which are unlocked by hitting the Stars scattered throughout the larger continuous levels. Players can win huge rewards by beating mini-levels that aid their progress through the continuous levels I labeled “worlds”, but if they lose, the level disappears along with their potential rewards.

When players beat a mini-level, they are given a chance to spin a slot machine to win highly valuable rewards. This reward comes in the form of world-moves, which allows them to make further progress in the worlds. So by beating a mini-level, players can continue to make progress through the world, which gets them to the next mini-level, which is another opportunity to earn more progress in the world, etc. It’s the overarching reward loop that makes it very important for players to win levels, encouraging them to spend money or watch advertisements in order to get more tries at a level or to earn in-game boosters which makes levels easier.

To maximize the “pinch”, I increased the value of beating levels by implementing a “win streak” mechanic into the core of the game. If players beat levels consecutively, they’ll win even more massive bonuses. This increases the effectiveness of “pinches” because players who are used to the massive rewards due to having a streak are not going to want to give them up. While many popular casual puzzle games of all types run occasional and temporary “win streak” events, Emoji Pop has maximized the value of this system by making it a core part of the game.

When I cut out the broken “saga-map” which has plagued Bubble Shooters for a decade, I realized that there were many insanely cool possibilities that had constantly been suppressed for the last decade due to their skill-based nature. By making levels temporary, I don’t have to shy away from complexity and difficulty like other Bubble Shooter designers who are constantly paranoid that any single level in a chain of thousands could prove too difficult, thus churning away thousands of players.

Unlike other Bubble Shooters, Emoji Pop is able to explore compelling new mechanics and modes. Whereas one has to beat hundreds of levels in most modern Bubble Shooters just to see something that a normal gamer might find compelling, players in Emoji Pop are exposed to several complex game elements within the first hour of gameplay. One example of this is the Dagger Emoji, which constantly spins, so players have to time their shot in order to launch the dagger. I’m currently exploring dozens of intricate mechanics and gameplay modes deeply based in timing, dexterity, and strategy, which players LOVE, in part because their failure to overcome such challenges does not result in permanent failure. The skill-based nature of Bubble Shooters is why many players are drawn to the genre, so these skill-based features deeply engage players like no other Bubble Shooter before it.

While the progression system of Emoji Pop does not have the advantage of hard-wall “pinch” levels that are proven to generate revenue, it motivates players to spend money or watch ads in other ways. The structure of continuous levels scattered with mini-levels, along with the highly variable rewards given for beating levels, creates a highly variable gameplay session. Sometimes, you might open the game, lose a level, and will have nothing to do after only a minute. Other times, you might win a level, build a win streak, and play for many minutes. I believe this variability is healthy, because players who experience an unsatisfactory play-session will have a deeper itch to keep playing because they know what it feels like to go on a long winning streak, and thus will be more tempted to spend money to beat a level or watch an ad to regenerate moves.

Getting to the top of each continuous level also unlocks a new Emoji-themed obstacle, which adds a crazy new mechanic to the game. Players can even use these Emojis to create their own levels, and share them with the world. I have worked very hard to expose the fun of Bubble Shooters in any way I can – incorporating it into the progression system, but also allowing players to dig into the design of this gameplay themselves, providing them with a series of tutorials which teach them the actual design principles that guide Bubble Shooters. If a player is interested in Bubble Shooter gameplay, the potential for investment is incredibly deep, and the ability for players to share levels and get them featured in the actual game. These hardcore players are transformed into creators of content and free marketers of the game.

Conclusion

Games including Match-3s strike a perfect balance between chance and skill, which makes levels almost endlessly replayable. These games are perfect for the saga-map model, which requires players happily lose the same level repeatedly. Skill-based games like Bubble Shooters, however, are inherently more skill-based, which means levels are not very replayable to casual audiences. These skill-based games are thus a poor fit for the saga-map model, a that problem cannot be remedied through the inclusion of chance-based elements.

For these skill-based casual games, we need to imagine new solutions for progression systems. In general, designers need to shirk the copy-paste mindset which runs rampant in the still nascent casual gaming industry, and instead learn to craft meta-systems designed specifically according to the properties of their own unique gameplay systems.

By solving this critical problem that plagues other Bubble Shooters on the market, new possibilities for my game Emoji Pop emerged that could never be considered before. This is a sign that the progression system is a natural fit for the game. Developers of bubble shooters always had to minimize the role of skill in the gameplay, but because players in Emoji Pop don’t get stuck on difficult puzzles, I was allowed to fully embrace skill-based elements which feel core to the genre but had always been repressed.

By consistently, and without question, adapting the same progression system so successful for the Match-3 genre, mobile game studios show that they don’t prioritize the design of their meta-systems. The problem is that these meta-systems are the main appeal of mobile games, not the core gameplay. For example, imagine if “Candy Crush Saga” was released decades ago on the Nintendo 64. Players would have said, “This game is kind of fun I guess, but doesn’t seem to warrant thousands of levels.” Mobile gamers play these games because of their progression systems, which give players treadmills of achievement to fill the boring crevices of their lives with the feeling of accomplishment, or at least the pursuit of it. We need to put way more effort into creatively designing these systems, coming up with original solutions based on the unique properties of a given gameplay system that allow the gameplay to shine in new ways. There should be multiple optimal solutions for each genre, now is the time to unearth them!

（source:gamasutra.com ）