开发者谈恐怖游戏可以借鉴的Roguelike游戏特色

原作者：Josh Bycer 译者：Willow Wu

我已经开始构思我的第四本关于游戏设计的书，主要关注的是恐怖游戏。在10月的时候，我本想试着寻找一些可以让我深入挖掘和享受的游戏，但这又让我不禁思考起了关于恐怖游戏的理想概念，以及这类游戏未来应该怎么发展。所以今天我想讲讲为什么恐怖游戏需要借鉴roguelikes游戏的设计。

对未知的恐惧

无论是哪种类型的恐惧，究其根本还是因为未知。你迈入一个场景，接下来会发生什么你一无所知。恐怖游戏中很多标志性时刻都是这样的——《生化危机1》里破窗而入的狗、《寂静岭2》中三角头的首次出场，还有《逃生》中你突然意识到自己陷入了多可怕的麻烦中……

它们跟《失忆症》这样的游戏，或者其它借用记忆缺失这个理由让玩家被困于迷雾之中的游戏都不一样。故事会在某个时间点被完全揭开，一般是在游戏的转折点或者是结尾，角色的记忆也是如此。但好的恐怖效果并不是要让玩家在所有谜团都解开后不禁大喊“原来是这样啊”。在某些非常经典的恐怖电影中我们也能看到类似的桥段设计（至少早期的电影是有的）。

“对未知的恐惧”，它的短板在于只能使用一次。我在上面两个段落提到的恐怖时刻，对玩家来说只有第一次是有效的，等他们下次再体验这个部分的时候，这只是一个已经预知的剧情事件罢了。

这就是roguelike设计可以发挥作用的地方，恐怖效果绝对会大大提升——但你必须设计成某种特定的随机效果。

定义随机

在我即将出版的第三本关于游戏设计的书中（聚焦的是roguelike设计），我提到了一个误解：任何随机元素都能在roguelike游戏中发挥作用。但好的roguelike游戏是有针对性地使用随机方式和程序生成。

那些布置了很多跳杀的恐怖游戏，它们的问题在于这些随机式惊吓不是为了丰富游戏玩法，而是为了吓到玩家。《玩具熊的五夜后宫》整个系列都是依靠跳杀来制造恐怖效果的。这种随机惊吓的缺点在于它一般都不会改变你玩游戏的方式，实际上，这类游戏的体验也是非常机械化和重复的。即使没有完全固定的玩法，这种随机模式一般也是很容易就能摸清套路。

Silent_Hill(from hongkiat.com)

优秀的roguelikes设计师都会有针对性地使用随机设计或程序生成，他们知道应用到游戏的哪些方面才能使价值最大化。这并不是为了制造混乱，而是在游戏的基础玩法上增加一些变化，形成不一样的游戏体验。也有一些恐怖游戏使用了程序生成，但它们产生的变化是非常有限的。在一个固定或狭小的游戏空间中给玩家添乱并不是我们所寻求的随机化。

在我的理想概念中，玩家每次重来时不仅敌人出现的位置会变化，而且敌人的种类也会变化。除此之外，影响游戏的事件也是随机出现的，迫使玩家在努力生存的同时还要随机应变。正如我们之前所说的，最好的roguelikes游戏是只告诉玩家他们之后大致会遇到什么，然后迫使他们每一周目都去适应变化。

完美的节奏

说道周目，这又是一个恐怖游戏可以借鉴的地方了。除了将玩家蒙在鼓里，恐怖游戏的另一个问题就是游戏体验的时长。恐怖效果是很难持续的，而且延长效果的方法也真的不多。通过加入更多的敌人或任务来延长时间并不能促使玩家保持沉浸。另外，重复的情景和游戏循环会让游戏变得无聊，淡化恐怖效果。

同样地，恐怖游戏或系列的持续时间越长，神秘感就越少。“在这个诡异的小镇上发生过一些扑朔迷离的事件”这样的情节你只能用这么些次，不然人们就会感到厌倦了，或者你可以尝试这解释这一切背后的缘由。

近年来的3部《生化危机》在节奏上多少都有些问题，对于系列第八部……我也是有些担忧。我觉得《生化危机7》就内容量来说游戏时间实在太长了，而《生化危机2》和《生化危机3》在恐怖体验太少，大部分时间都是战斗。

因此，roguelike设计和节奏是可以应用到恐怖游戏上的（下文我们会举例分析）。在今年年初的时候，我曾说我对即将发行的游戏《恐怖的世界》非常期待，它的节奏设计就类似于roguelike，通过更短的单周目流程进一步强化了游戏的神秘感。一般不到一小时就能完成一周目，就如其它优秀的roguelike游戏一样，你重玩的每一个小时都能获得不一样的游戏体验。专注于单周目的变化也有助于在不影响游戏节奏的情况下延长恐怖游戏的时长。

微型恐怖游戏

我们在近期发现的另一个选项就是开发以恐怖元素为核心的小游戏。Dread X Collection系列就是这样的小型恐怖游戏合集，它们都是由知名独立开发者创作的。每一代合集都会有不同的主题，开发者们可以在此基础上任意发挥。这些小游戏都是在极短的时间内做完的。

不同游戏的质量水平和设计风格自然也就不同，但Dread X Collection让人们看到了恐怖游戏设计的另一条道路——做体积小但是设计独特的游戏。这些游戏的时长足够让人们体验一个完整的故事，获得过瘾的恐怖体验，但又不会因为流程过长而感到厌烦，甚至不想再玩下去了。

把它们做成合集也能能够规避只卖一个小游戏所面临的挑战。这样的捆绑包可以让消费者获得更多的价值，有更大的概率能找到一个真正喜欢的游戏。

理解战斗

关于最后一点，我想我之前已经讨论过很多次了：恐怖游戏必须要有一种特定的战斗方式。在我看来，现代恐怖游戏的主要问题之一就是开发者莫名其妙地移除了某些机制。很多开发者，比如《失忆症》系列的开发商Frictional会说反驳说战斗机制会消除恐怖游戏的紧张感和恐惧感。

从某种程度上说，他们并没有错，但事情并不是这么简单的。像《生化危机》《死亡空间》《心灵杀手》，还有其它2A/3A级别的游戏，它们的问题就是战斗成为了拉长游戏时间的一种手段。只靠增加战斗是无法撑起一款恐怖游戏的，你想把恐怖游戏做到8个多小时肯定是行不通的。但同样，如果恐怖游戏的交互内容太少，效果也不好。

如果玩家在游戏过程中只能做一件事，就比如逃跑，那游戏至始至终都是围绕着这一机制来设计的，非常单调，恐怖效果自然也就大打折扣了。恐怖游戏中的战斗不应该是盲目的， 而是要讲究战术。玩家应该能明显看出，跟敌人战斗是有舍有得的。这样做的目的并不是让玩家想要一直战斗下去，而是进一步丰富每段游戏体验。

再结合我们之前说的更短的流程，我希望恐怖游戏能够采取一种更走心的战斗模式。不应该依靠“量”去制造战斗的紧张氛围，而是用“质”。这就是为什么我们能够记住像《异形：隔离》中的异形Xenomorph、《生化危机2》中的Mr.X，当然还有《寂静岭》三角头这些敌对角色。

要特别说的是，当我们在谈论恐怖游戏中的战斗时，它们并不总是意味着“杀戮”。你可以朝Mr.X开枪，暂时性地阻止他的追杀攻势，但是不到boss战时你是没办法杀死他的。敌人不应该是由玩家触发的，而是应该主动参与，在游戏中时不时地猎杀玩家。同样，所有的这一切是为了让游戏尽可能变得有趣、与众不同。游戏也应该能够在不发起战斗的情况下跟敌人互动。

我已经见过太多太多只能回避，而不能想办法转移敌人注意力的恐怖游戏了。

未来的恐怖游戏

经过对恐怖游戏的一番思考，近期我应该会坐下来重写我的设计文档。随着新一代主机的问世，我想是时候重新思考恐怖游戏的设计了，开发者应该尝试着去借鉴优秀roguelike游戏的多样性和紧张氛围的塑造。反复地跳杀、躲柜子，把一个恐怖游戏拉长到8~12小时——我们不能再这样做了。

在独立游戏的被动式恐怖与3A游戏的动作式恐怖之间其实还存在着一个中间地带，现在我们只需要加以探索，在此基础上发展新的恐怖游戏。

本文由游戏邦编译，转载请注明来源，或咨询微信zhengjintiao

I’ve begun thinking about how I want to approach my fourth book on design, focusing on the horror genre. During October I tried to find current and recent titles that I could really dig into and enjoy, but instead, it made me think of my dream concept for a horror game and where I feel the genre needs to go. For today, we’re going to talk about why horror needs to take notes from roguelikes.

Fear of the Unknown

Horror, in any capacity, is about the unknown. The fact that you’re walking into a situation that you don’t know what’s going to happen. There are many iconic moments in videogame horror that are just that—the dog jumping through the window in Resident Evil 1, the first appearance by Pyramid Head in Silent Hill 2, and the moment you realize just how much trouble you’re in with Outlast to name a few.

This is not the same as a game like the Amnesia series or other examples that use amnesia as a way of keeping the player in the dark. The story, like the character’s memory, will be sorted out at some point for either the twist or conclusion of the game. The best horror is not about having that “aha!” moment when everything is figured out. We can see similar aspects of some of the most iconic horror movies (at least in the early entries).

The problem with the unknown is that “unknown” only works one time. Those moments I mentioned two paragraphs up can only be experienced one time by the audience; after that, it just becomes another story beat that you’ll remember the next time you play.

This is where roguelike design can come in to greatly improve horror, but it must be a specific kind of random.

Defining Random

In my upcoming third book focusing on roguelike design, I talked about the misconception that any kind of random elements will work with roguelikes. Good roguelike design is about a targeted form of randomization and procedural generation (in some cases).

The problem with a lot of the jumpscare-focused horror games is that the randomization is not about playing the game but trying to scare the player. In the Five Nights at Freddy’s series, the entire M.O. is about the jumpscare that’s coming to get you. The problem with this kind of random is that it’s not changing how you play the game, oftentimes, the actual way to play them is very mechanical and repetitive. Even if there is not a 100% fixed way to play, the randomization is often simple enough to figure out repeatable patterns.

The best roguelikes designers and their games explicitly target specific aspects of their games that the random or procedural generation will be used on to get the most value. It’s not about creating pure chaos but having enough variance on the foundation that can lead to different experiences. There are horror games out there that use procedural generation, but it is of the most basic variety. Simply shuffling where the player needs to go in a fixed or small gamespace is not the randomization that we’re looking for.

For my dream concept, I envision a game where not only the enemy positions are different per playthrough, but what enemies will appear. On top of that, game affecting events will be randomly chosen that force the player to adapt on top of trying to survive. As we’ve talked about before, the best roguelikes give the player a basic idea of what to expect, and then forces them to adapt to the changing and situations on each run.

The Perfect Pace

Speaking about “runs,” this is another area where roguelike and horror design should go together. The other problem that horror games have besides keeping the player in the dark is the length of the experience. Horror is very hard to sustain over extended periods of time and there is a limit to how much can be added to prolong it. Throwing more enemies or tasks to complete to pad out the time doesn’t help to keep the player invested in the game. Also, repeating situations and gameplay loops will become tiresome and stretches out the horror.

Likewise, the longer a horror game, or series, goes on for, the less mysterious everything becomes. You can only repeat the “It’s a strange town where strange things happen” plot so many times before people get bored, or you try to explain why it’s all happening.

Pacing is a problem that I’ve seen in the three latest Resident Evil titles, and a concern I have for RE 8. Seven felt that it went on too long for the content that’s there, while 2 and 3 were too short on horror and filled most of its time with combat.

Therefore, roguelike design and pacing fits horror (as well as one example we’ll talk about next). Earlier in 2020 I spoke about my love of the upcoming game World of Horror and how it distills the mysteriousness that works in horror with the shorten pace of a roguelike run. A typical play of the game is under an hour, but like any good roguelike, what happens in said hour is different each time you play. Implementing a run focus would also help to add length to the playtime of a horror game without impacting the pacing of playing one.

Micro Horror

Another option that we have seen lately is the idea of microgames focusing on horror elements. The Dread X Collection series is all about compilations of horror titles from well-known indie developers in the space. Each collection features titles made in a short period built on a specific theme, while the design can be anything.

The quality, as well as the design, is as varied as it can get between the games, but the Dread X Collection represents another avenue for horror design. Focusing on bite-sized plays with unique game design. The games are long enough to get their point across, without overstaying their welcome or losing the tension of playing them.

Having them as compilations also gets around the challenge of selling just one microgame. By putting together, a pack, it allows the consumer to get more value and gives them a greater chance of finding one game they really enjoy from the set.

Figuring out Fighting

For our final point, we turn to one that I have talked about many times over: Horror games must have a way to “fight”. One of the major failings in my opinion of modern-day horror has been removing mechanics in favor of nothing. Many developers, such as Frictional with the Amnesia series, will defend this by saying that combat removes the fear and tension of a horror game.

In a way, they are correct, but it’s not as straightforward as that. The problem with horror titles like Resident Evil, Dead Space, Alan Wake, and other AA/AAA examples, is that the combat becomes a form of padding out the game. You can’t sustain a horror game with just more combat, and why the idea of an 8 hour plus horror game doesn’t work. Likewise, a horror game can’t work if the interaction is kept too minimum.

If the player can only do one thing while playing (IE: Run away) then every situation is about that. Instead of thinking on the fly, the game becomes a case of repeating the same thing repeatedly, another killer of horror. Combat in a horror game should not be mindless, but tactical. The player should feel that there is an obvious give and take to engaging with enemies. The point isn’t to make the player want to fight all the time but adding weight to each experience.

The Dread X Collection’s focus on micro horror is another alternative for horror design
Combined with a shorter pace as we have discussed, and I want to see horror adopt a more “visceral” form of combat. It shouldn’t be about the dangers of fighting 100 enemies, but just fighting one. This is often why we remember alpha antagonists like the xenomorph of Alien Isolation, Mr. X of Resident Evil 2, and of course, Pyramid Head encounters in Silent Hill 2.

An important note, when we talk about fighting in horror games, that doesn’t always mean “to kill.” You can shoot Mr. X as many times as you want and stop him momentarily, but the player cannot kill him until the boss fights. Enemies should not be set to be triggered by the player but be active participants and hunt for them during the play. Again, the goal of all this is to make a run of a game as interesting, and as different, as possible. There should also be ways to interact with the enemies that doesn’t involve combat.

I’ve lost count of the number of horror games that are all about avoidance, but never give the player any way of distracting enemies.

The Future of Fear

One of these days I should sit down and re-write my design doc for my horror idea, as I’m surprised more developers haven’t gone down this route yet. With the next generation of consoles coming out, it is time to rethink horror design and combine that with the variety and tension of playing a good roguelike. We need to stop treating horror games as an eight to twenty-hour experience built on the same pool of jumpscares and hiding inside lockers.

There is a middle ground between the passive horror of the indie space, and the action-horror of AAA titles, now we just need to build on it.

(source: gamasutra)