游戏,让学习成瘾pdf_设计上瘾的视频游戏-CSDN博客

游戏,让学习成瘾pdf

游戏设计伦理 (GAME DESIGN ETHICS)

Well, that’s kind of tricky question. Video games were born to be fun. Their origin lays in the sheer curiosity of the engineers that made them. They asked themselves whether they could make something fun from the boring machines of their time. And yes, they could.

w ^ ELL，这是一种棘手的问题。 电子游戏天生就是乐趣。 它们的起源在于制造它们的工程师的好奇心。 他们问自己是否可以从无聊的机器中取乐。 是的，他们可以。

But origin means nothing. Computers were made for processing data, but we now mainly use them for communication. Phones were made to make calls, and we now use for…well, everything. Every invention has its first use, but only in rare cases it remains the sole one as time goes on.

但是，起源毫无意义。制造计算机是为了处理数据，但现在我们主要将它们用于通信。打电话是用来打电话的，现在我们用来……一切。每一项发明都有其首次使用，但只有在极少数情况下，随着时间的推移，它仍然是唯一的发明。

Games don’t have to be fun. I know this may sound stupid, why would anyone play a game if it isn’t any fun? But this is not the point. I’m not trying to say games should try to be boring. I’m just saying they shouldn’t strive to be fun. Or at least, not all of them.

游戏不必很有趣 。我知道这听起来很愚蠢，为什么没人玩游戏呢？但这不是重点。我并不是要说游戏应该很无聊。我只是说他们不应该努力变得有趣 。或至少不是全部 。

To understand the point I’m trying to make, we need to look at video games from two different angles.

为了理解我要提出的观点，我们需要从两个不同的角度来看视频游戏。

First, we have the monetary side. Games are (generally) commercial products. Companies need to generate revenue from them. No revenue means no more game production, at least professionally. I won’t seek to make war on capitalism and say artistic expression should always be the priority. But…

首先，我们在货币方面。游戏(通常)是商业产品。公司需要从中产生收入。没有收入意味着至少从专业上来说，不再有游戏制作。我不会试图对资本主义发动战争，并说艺术表达应始终是首要任务。但…

That’s exactly the second angle we need to look at them from. Games are an expression of those who make them, of how they perceive the world, of how they think humans relate, of the ideas that fly through their minds. And as such, I believe a game’s only objective should be to convey something to its players.

那正是我们需要从中观察它们的第二个角度。 游戏是那些创造它们的人们，他们如何看待世界，人们如何看待人类，以及在他们的思想中飞扬的思想的一种表达。因此，我认为游戏的唯一目标应该是传达一些信息给玩家。

There is a natural tension here, of course. Two different contenders are squabbling over what a game should be at its core. When a game designer wears the commercial hat, as they usually must, their priority is to make money. But when they don an artistic/creator hat, their priority is transmitting ideas. Sometimes those two concepts dovetail beautifully and everyone’s happy. But in general, the tension remains.

当然，这里有一种自然的张力。两种不同的竞争者都争吵不休游戏应该是其核心内容。当游戏设计师通常需要戴商务帽时，他们的首要任务是赚钱。但是，当他们戴上艺术/创作者的帽子时，他们的首要任务是传达思想。有时，这两个概念完美地融合在一起，每个人都很高兴。但总的来说，紧张局势仍然存在。

设计成瘾 (Designing for addiction)

So, how do you make a game more commercially viable? There are two main ways to do this.

那么，您如何使游戏更具商业可行性？有两种主要方法可以做到这一点。

The first one is making your game better. It’s hard to define what makes a game better or worse, so this is especially tricky. You can try to improve your graphics, improve performance, add new features, adjust the mechanics, etc… But after you’ve done all of those things, you may release it just to find out no one likes what you’ve made, and you’ve ‘wasted’ enormous amounts of effort and money.

第一个是使您的游戏变得更好 。很难定义什么因素会使游戏变得更好或更糟，因此这特别棘手。您可以尝试改善图形，提高性能，添加新功能，调整机制等。但是，在完成所有这些操作之后，您可以发布它，只是发现没有人喜欢您所做的事情，并且您已经“浪费”了大量的精力和金钱。

Is it possible to make a game more successful without actually making it better, though? Perhaps. If you’re looking for more profit, especially in the short term, your goal is likely to drive up the number of people purchasing your game — and if you want more people to buy your game without actually making it better, this means exploiting players’ needs.

但是，是否有可能使游戏变得更成功而不真正使游戏变得更好呢？也许。如果您正在寻找更多的利润，特别是在短期内，那么您的目标可能会增加购买游戏的人数–如果您希望更多的人购买游戏而不实际改善游戏质量，这意味着剥削玩家的需要。

No smoker in the world would tell you smoking is good (hopefully), but every one of them would agree that it feels good or provides some kind of instant reward/gratification. It’s the same with games. Exploiting the mechanisms of our bodies that liberate dopamine doesn’t make a game good. In fact, the more you exploit them, the more your game sucks.

世界上没有吸烟者会(希望)告诉你吸烟是好的，但是每个人都同意吸烟的感觉或提供某种即时的奖励/满足感。游戏也是一样。利用我们的身体释放多巴胺的机制并不能使游戏变得更好。实际上，您利用它们的机会越多，游戏的吸引力就越大。

Image for post — Mathew MacQuarrie. Mathew MacQuarrie摄。

Although this theory has one major flaw. Dopamine is our greatest behavioral motivator. Without dopamine, we would lay still and die (literally). So what’s the difference between a game that intends to produce dopamine and one that doesn’t consider it? It’s exactly that, intention. Dopamine should be naturally generated as we play. Not because the designer is forcing it, but because we are enjoying the experience.

尽管这一理论有一个重大缺陷。多巴胺是我们最大的行为动机。没有多巴胺，我们会静止不动而死( 字面上 )。那么，打算生产多巴胺的游戏与不考虑多巴胺的游戏有什么区别？意图就是如此。多巴胺应该在我们比赛时自然产生。不是因为设计师在强迫这样做，而是因为我们享受着这种体验。

We can reduce to two the mechanisms some games take advantage of. The first one is learning. Whenever we feel like we are learning something and improving our knowledge about a topic, we feel good. The second one is repeating a difficult action, like getting a headshot in a shooter. Each time we do it, our body rewards us because it thinks improving an ability may raise our survival chances.

我们可以将某些游戏利用的机制减少到两种。第一个是学习。每当我们觉得自己正在学习某些东西并提高对某个主题的知识时，我们都会感觉很好。第二个是重复困难的动作，例如在射手中爆头。每次我们这样做，我们的身体都会给我们带来回报，因为它认为提高能力可能会增加我们的生存机会。

Both of these mechanisms can be exploited. Games can keep teaching the player useless things to make him feel like he is learning, even if he isn’t. And, most commonly, games can make the player repeat certain actions that feel hard so he feels like he is improving when truly he is not. Excessive loot on games is one of the most common applications of this last one. Bombarding the player with objects makes him feel like he is achieving things and growing, yet it renders him no real value.

这两种机制都可以利用。游戏可以不断教给玩家一些无用的东西，即使他没有，也能让他感到自己正在学习。而且，最常见的是，游戏可以使玩家重复某些难以忍受的动作，因此当他确实不是真正的人时，他会感觉自己在进步。游戏中的过多战利品是最后一个游戏中最常见的应用之一。用物体轰击玩家会让他觉得自己正在成就并成长，但这并没有赋予他真正的价值。

Exploiting our dopamine circuitry is not that easy, so generally games can’t do it unintentionally. If a game’s mechanics are sugared, that was most likely the intention of the designer.

利用我们的多巴胺电路并不是那么容易，因此通常游戏不能无意间做到这一点。如果游戏的机制很复杂，那很可能是设计者的意图。

避免上瘾的机制 (Avoiding addictive mechanics)

If you’ve been playing games for a while, chances are you’ve played some games with sugared mechanics along the way. It’s ok, you are not going to die from it. But should you try to avoid them from now on? Are they actually bad?

如果您玩游戏已经有一段时间了，那么您可能会在此过程中以加糖的机制玩过一些游戏。没关系，您不会因此而丧命。但是您现在应该避免使用它们吗？他们真的不好吗？

It depends. If you are sure it doesn’t affect you the slightest, you can keep playing addictive games and be just fine. But if you like me easily fall under bad behavioral patterns, you should stay away from them.

这取决于。如果您确定不会对您有丝毫影响，则可以继续玩令人上瘾的游戏，并且一切都很好。但是，如果喜欢我的人容易陷入不良的行为模式，则应远离它们。

Games that aim to trigger those dopamine spots are usually very addictive. For most people, it won’t have dramatic effects. You probably won’t lose your job because you are playing the latest Call of Duty, nor will your girlfriend dump you, nor will you stop going to the gym, and so on.

旨在触发这些多巴胺斑点的游戏通常会令人上瘾。对于大多数人来说，它不会产生巨大的影响。您可能不会因为正在玩最新的《 使命召唤》而失去工作，女友也不会甩掉您，也不会停止上体育馆等等。

The effects of mild addictions cannot be easily perceived. Your close ones might not even see a difference in your behavior. But deep down, you know you are playing just because of the sugar rush. You know you may not be destroying your life, but you are little by little deteriorating it. You go to the gym, but you arrive late because you were finishing a game. You pay attention to your girlfriend, but not all the attention she deserves because you are thinking about the game. You get work done, but just the bare minimum so you have a little more time to play.

轻度成瘾的影响不容易被察觉。亲密的人可能甚至看不到您的行为有所不同。但在内心深处，您知道您在玩游戏只是因为糖味旺盛。 您知道您可能并没有破坏自己的生活，但是您的生活却在不断恶化 。您去体育馆，但是因为完成比赛而迟到了。您关注的是女友，但并不是所有她应得的关注，因为您正在考虑比赛。您可以完成工作，但仅需最低限度，因此您有更多时间玩。

I’ve been there, I know how it feels. You try to convince yourself it’s not a problem. You compare yourself with addicts to hard drugs and see the huge differences. Of course, there are huge differences; but if you need to compare yourself to a crack addict to think you’re okay, maybe you do have a problem. The good news is that since the addiction these games create is soft, it’s pretty easy to get rid of it. Just recognize it, once you acknowledge the problem, it will vanish as quickly as it appeared.

我去过那里，我知道感觉如何。您尝试说服自己这不是问题。您将自己与吸毒成瘾者进行比较，并看到巨大的差异。当然，两者之间存在巨大差异。但是，如果您需要将自己与痴迷的瘾君子进行比较以认为自己还好，那么也许您确实有问题。好消息是，由于这些游戏产生的沉迷感很弱，因此消除它很容易。只需识别它，一旦您确认了问题，它就会像出现一样Swift消失。

If you believe having fun should be the number one priority when it comes to games (which I find a rightful belief), just remember:

如果您认为娱乐是游戏的第一要务(我认为是对的)，那么请记住：