Josh Bycer談吃雞遊戲的設計問題及改良建議
Josh Bycer談吃雞遊戲的設計問題及改良建議
原作者：Josh Bycer 譯者：Vivian Xue
過去幾個月人們一直希望我直播吃雞遊戲，於是我試玩了Apex Legends。大約三小時後，我發現自己又回到了剛開始的狀態——無法理解吃雞遊戲的設計。
在以團隊第二名的成績完成了某場比賽後，我發現了這種遊戲設計的問題所在。儘管遊戲開發者稱他們在創造多人遊戲的未來，但實際上他們只是在重複著以往平平無奇的設計。
吃雞遊戲的基本介紹：
如果你錯過了過去一年的吃雞遊戲熱潮，這部分將幫助你快速瞭解它。一大群沒有任何武器裝備的玩家（通常超過50個）被投放到同一張地圖上，基礎裝備隨機散佈在地圖上，更高階的裝備藏在特定地點。每隔幾分鐘，地圖會隨機縮小——迫使玩家聚集到越來越小的環境中直到僅剩一名玩家，遊戲結束。
從H1Z1，到Apex Legends，以及所有未來的吃雞遊戲，這個型別的發展速度驚人。如今很多傳統的多人射擊遊戲都加入了吃雞模式——比如《戰地5》和《使命召喚》。在我討論設計問題前，讓我們看看這個型別為什麼變得如此流行。
吃雞遊戲的特點：
儘管已經存在《絕地求生》和H1Z1這樣的遊戲，一款新的吃雞遊戲仍然可以很快席捲主流市場。從設計上看，它的刺激程度並沒有比市場上其它射擊遊戲高。玩《守望先鋒》或者《使命召喚》時，你面對的是小規模、但高強度的戰鬥。
在吃雞遊戲中，戰鬥有可能很快結束，但通常情況下將持續更長的時間。吃雞遊戲的節奏變化也和傳統射擊遊戲不同。戰鬥一開始節奏很慢（取決於你的著陸點），因為你需要不斷蒐集生存所需的物資和裝備。
儘管遊戲地圖是固定的，但地圖上安全區的劃定是隨機的，因此打法也會隨之改變。充足的隨機元素防止遊戲陷入固化，同時為每一場比賽設定了節奏。
我認為吃雞遊戲的一個設計問題在於它使我回想起了rogue-like遊戲，但不是那種好的rogue-like遊戲。
存在的問題：
多年來市場上發行了眾多質量參差不齊的rogue-like遊戲，決定遊戲好壞的關鍵在於變數（Variance）。變數越大的遊戲每次的體驗都不同，從而避免重複枯燥。
未能創造變數的遊戲無法提供使每一場比賽與眾不同的隨機性或程式生成元素。我在之前的文章中討論過《塞爾達傳說》之類的rogue-like遊戲，以及僅僅讓玩家在硬編碼的景點間移動的問題。問題是無論地圖多麼隨機，玩家總是在做同樣的事情。
Rogue-like遊戲中固定的元素越多，就越容易產生一套固定的策略。即便存在隨機元素，如果它們對玩法的改變起不到什麼作用，還是會產生同樣的問題。優秀的rogue-like遊戲提供多種勝利方式，避免產生唯一的最佳策略。
我提到的這些都是設計師在設計rogue-like玩法時常犯的錯誤，但吃雞遊戲存在相同的問題。我想你們可能會問：我該怎麼設計吃雞遊戲呢？
設計改良建議：
本文所持的觀點是，吃雞模式之所以成功，是因為它模仿了rogue-like設計，提供足夠的隨機性以使玩家不斷玩下去。然而，我認為它並沒有突破rogue-like玩法。
如果讓我設計，首先我會優化地圖本身，使它隨機化或者由程式生成。即便玩家從一個不同的方向進入遊戲區域，地圖上的重要區域或景點仍然保持不變。如此一來，遊戲空間就擁有了雙重隨機性：地圖本身和安全區縮小的方式。我們還可以進一步創造隨機事件，不過這樣會使遊戲的隨機性過大。
在裝備方面，我希望裝備由程式隨機生成，或者擴大裝備的數量，大到它們無法在一場遊戲中全部出現。當前吃雞遊戲的一個問題是每場比賽中總會出現頂級裝備，首先獲得該裝備的玩家將很容易主宰遊戲。
玩家在遊戲中不應該只專注於找最強的武器。通過多樣化武器，使每個玩家都小心翼翼並增加每一場最終對決中的策略選擇。
和其它吃雞遊戲相比，Apex Legends有兩個令我很喜愛的地方：組隊玩法和英雄角色。我不太瞭解吃雞遊戲，無法評價單人模式和組隊模式的流行程度對比，但我認為吃雞遊戲都應該包含組隊模式。
在角色方面，提供擁有獨特技能玩法的英雄有利於減少遊戲的重複率。儘管Apex Legends做到了這一點，但我覺得他們做的仍然不夠。我希望吃雞遊戲可以提供某種程度上的個性化服務——像MOBA遊戲一樣讓玩家自己設定角色形象，或者像《軍團要塞2》一樣提供武器面板。
再次強調，這些改良的關鍵在於增加遊戲體驗的隨機性。MOBA遊戲讓玩家組隊做出利於全體的一致決策也是出於這個目的。
型別遊戲的泛濫：
吃雞型別遊戲甚至未能擺脫同質化的命運，2019年更多的遊戲將會發行，如果開發者們執意追隨《堡壘之夜》或《絕地求生》的腳步，我想它將和MMO遊戲一樣面臨氾濫的危機。
你完全可以創造自己的遊戲公式，那麼問題來了——你會怎麼設計吃雞型別遊戲呢？
本文由遊戲邦編譯，轉載請註明來源，或諮詢微信zhengjintiao
After months of people asking me to try a battle royale on my daily livestream, I had a chance to try Apex Legends. After about three hours of play, I found myself back in the same position I had before I started—just not getting into Battle Royale design.
After finishing a match somehow on the second place squad, I had a realization about the problem with this form of game design. Despite developers claiming they’re creating the future of multiplayer games, they’re all really just chasing the same example of lackluster game design.
Battle Royale Primer:
As always, if you have somehow missed the Battle Royale craze this past year, then here’s a quick catch up. A large number of players (usually above 50) are put on the same set map with no weapons or equipment. Basic gear is randomly spawned around the map, with higher quality in more specific areas. Every few minutes, the map itself shrinks in a random direction—forcing players to converge in smaller and smaller environments until there is only one person left standing.
From H1Z1, to Apex Legends, and to all the future Battle Royale games in the works, the genre has taken off in a big way. We are also seeing many traditional multiplayer shooters adding in a Battle Royale mode as another option—such as Battlefield 5 and Call of Duty. Before I talk about my problems with the design, let’s discuss why this has gotten so popular.
The Chicken Dinner:
Battle Royale is one of those games that just quickly snuck up on everyone in the mainstream market despite titles like PUBG and H1Z1. From a design standpoint, it is less intensive compared to other shooters on the market. When you play a game like Overwatch or COD, you are having small, but very intense matches.
With a Battle Royale game, a match can be over quickly, but usually will take longer to play out. There are peaks and valleys when it comes to the pacing of a Battle Royale shooter that you don’t see in traditional shooters. The beginning of a match tends to be very slow (depending on your landing point), as you try to get the basic resources and equipment you need to keep going.
While the map is indeed fixed, by randomly deciding what part of the map to focus on changes the basic play of a match. There are just enough random elements at play to keep the game from becoming stale, while still having a set pace to each match.
The problem I have with battle royale design is that it’s reminding me of rogue-like design, but not in a good way.
Battle Rogue:
Over the years we have seen many rogue-like titles released of varying qualities, and the one key area that distinguishes the good from the bad is variance. A game with high amounts of variance can provide different experiences on each play; preventing the game from becoming repetitive.
Titles that fail to create variance end up not providing enough random or procedural elements to make each play feel unique. In an earlier post I talked about the issues of Zelda-rogues and just moving around hard-coded points of interest. The problem is that no matter how random the map is, the player is still doing the same things.
The more elements in a rogue-like that are fixed, the greater the chance of developing a set strategy that works every time. Even if there are randomized elements, if they don’t go far enough in terms of changing the play, then those patterns can form. Good rogue-likes provide multiple ways of winning and avoid having just one best option.
What I just described are elements that designers tend to slip up on when it comes to rogue-like gameplay, but the same could be said of the Battle Royale genre. With that said, I’m sure some of you are wondering: how would I design a Battle Royale game?
Improving Battle Royale:
The thesis for this post is that the Battle Royale genre works because it emulates aspects of rogue-like design to provide plays that are just random enough to keep players invested. However, it doesn’t go far enough in my opinion to push that rogue-like play.
The first thing I would do is to do more with the map itself and make it either randomized or procedural. Even if the players are approaching the gamespace in a different direction, it still doesn’t change important areas or points of interest on the map. This way, we have double randomization going on in terms of the space: the map itself and how the ring condenses. We could go one step further and have randomized events that could happen, but that may take the RNG too far in that case.
In terms of gear, I would like to see either procedurally generated gear, or having such a large pool of items that it’s not possible that everything can spawn in a single game. The problem that I see is that there is always gear that is considered top-tier, and whoever gets it first will have a good chance of dominating.
Players should not just focus on the #1 weapon each play. By diversifying the pool, it keeps everyone on their toes and provides more options when you get to the end part of each match.
For me, there are two areas of Apex Legends that I did like compared to other Battle Royale games: The squad-based gameplay and the champions. I’m not versed enough in Battle Royale Meta to comment on the popularity of single vs. squad matches, but I do think squad should always be a legitimate mode in a Battle Royale title.
That also plays into the idea of champions. Having unique characters with their own spins on the gameplay does a lot to keep things repetitive. While Apex Legends does this, I don’t think they go far enough with this concept. I would like to see a Battle Royale game that allows for some aspect of customization—either having champions go the MOBA route of being uniquely different or going the Team Fortress 2 route of having sidegrade equipment.
Again, the key aspect here is to introduce more randomization to the experience. This can also be tied to the squad gameplay of having people making the same kind of decisions and synergies that we see in the MOBA space.
First Person Rogue-Likes:
The Battle Royale genre is not even close to leaving the popular zeitgeist, and I know we have many more games coming in 2019. If developers continue to solely chase after Fortnite or PUBG, I feel we will be looking at another MMO-styled crash.
There is still plenty of room to create your own takes on the Battle Royal formula. So with that said—How would you design the perfect Battle Royale Game?（source： Gamasutra ）