晚上诱捕白面鸡放公叫_免费游戏如何通过设计诱捕玩家-CSDN博客

晚上诱捕白面鸡放公叫

Just recently, I wrote a piece on free to play and mobile design, with specific reference to gacha and lootbox mechanics. In the same piece, I mentioned the game Arknights and how it was still in its honeymoon period. Well, that period is over and it didn’t end well. In this piece, I’m going to hone in specifically on the free to play — especially its more pernicious aspects.

就在 最近， 我写了一篇关于免费游戏和移动设计的文章 ，其中特别提到了gacha和lootbox的机制。 在同一篇文章中，我提到了游戏《 Arknights》及其在蜜月时期的状况。好吧，那段时期已经过去，而且进展不顺利。在这篇文章中，我将专门针对免费游戏进行磨练，尤其是其更为有害的方面。

捕鲸 (Snaring a whale)

As everyone knows, the lack of up front payment to get into a free-to-play game is a major attraction for people to give them a try. There are other ways that free-to-play games generate revenue (such as ads), but these methods are fundamentally different from both gacha and lootbox design in large part because the latter are designed to keep players invested in playing.

众所周知，缺乏免费支付进入免费游戏的吸引力是人们尝试的主要吸引力。免费游戏还有其他产生收益的方法(例如广告)，但是这些方法与gacha和lootbox设计在根本上是不同的，因为后者的设计目的是让玩家投入到游戏上。

The most addictive games fully understand that if you want to keep someone playing (and turn them into a whale — a person who spends a large amount of money on a mobile game), you need to get them invested. One way to think about player investment is to consider time and money. This topic was discussed by Valve at a GDC talk some time ago in the context of Team Fortress 2. Valve were telling the story about the game’s move to a free-to-play model, where revenue was generated via the Mann Co. store. As part of the presentation, they discussed the concepts of time and money, and how every player values them differently. One person might play a game for hundreds of hours and won’t be prepared to spend a single dollar, just as another person might happily spend hundreds of dollars if it means accomplishing months of tasks within mere minutes.

最令人上瘾的游戏完全理解，如果您想让某人玩(并将他们变成鲸鱼，即在手机游戏上花费大量金钱的人)，则需要让他们进行投资。思考玩家投资的一种方法是考虑时间和金钱 。 Valve早在GDC 团队2的背景下在GDC演讲中讨论了此主题。瓦尔(Valve)讲述了有关游戏向免费游戏模式转变的故事，该游戏通过Mann Co.商店产生收入。作为演示的一部分，他们讨论了时间和金钱的概念，以及每个参与者如何不同地看待它们。一个人可能会玩数百小时的游戏，而不会准备花一美元，就像另一个人可能会乐于花费数百美元(如果这意味着在短短几分钟内完成数月的任务)。

Free-to-play game designers have been courting both personalities for years. Many mobile games include both massive in-game stores with banners that encourage people to spend money in order to make up time in some way. But those folks who don’t want to spend money are funnelled through progression systems that are built upon repetitive tasks and grinding.

免费游戏设计师多年来一直在追求两种个性。许多手机游戏都在大型游戏商店中都设有标语，以鼓励人们花钱以某种方式弥补时间。但是，那些不想花钱的人可以通过基于重复性任务和磨练的进度系统来集中精力。

Gamers are sometimes tempted to label developers who use these tactics as “stupid” or “lazy”. But they are nothing of the sort. These tactics are deliberate and very finely-tuned. One of the more pernicious elements of this approach, though, is the way it leverages the sunk cost fallacy.

有时，游戏玩家倾向于将使用这些策略的开发人员标记为“愚蠢”或“懒惰”。但是它们不是那种。这些策略是经过深思熟虑且经过精心调整的。但是，此方法更有害的元素之一是它利用沉没成本谬误的方式。

沉没成本谬误 (Sunk cost fallacy)

The sunk cost fallacy is a term used to describe that tendency for someone to keep investing in something due to already having done it before, hence the sunk cost. Free-to-play designers know that the goal is to get someone to spend money one time — even if it is just a dollar. Once someone has invested in a free-to-play game, they are more willing to do it again, and more importantly, keep playing.

沉没成本谬误是一个术语，用于描述某人由于之前已经做过某件事而继续投资某项东西的趋势，因此，它是沉没成本。免费游戏设计师知道，目标是让某人花钱一次，即使只是一美元。一旦有人投资了免费游戏，他们就会更愿意再次进行游戏，更重要的是，继续玩游戏。

When we usually talk about the sunk cost fallacy it has to do with spending money — as that is the popular interpretation — but this can also apply to time. For someone who does not want to spend money, there is always the option of spending time. Resources can be earned by repeating content already done, or constantly logging in to repeat a task.

当我们通常谈论沉没成本谬误时，这与花钱有关(这是流行的解释)，但这也可能适用于时间。对于不想花钱的人，总可以选择花时间。可以通过重复已经完成的内容或不断登录以重复执行任务来获得资源。

In Arknights, characters require multiple resources to upgrade their various traits. If you do not spend money, you are going to have to repeat missions again and again for those items. Even putting the game at 2X speed, you are still waiting anywhere from one to four minutes watching a map on autopilot to collect said resources. Even though that does not sound like a long time, all those minutes do add up. Again, you are going to be doing this constantly, as said resources are not guaranteed drops, and you have (at minimum) 11 characters to do this for.

在Arknights中 ，角色需要多种资源来升级其各种特征。如果您不花钱，那么您将不得不为这些物品一次又一次地重复执行任务。即使以2倍的速度运行游戏，您仍然需要等待一到四分钟的时间，观看自动驾驶仪上的地图以收集上述资源。即使听起来并不长，所有这些分钟的确加起来。同样，您将不断地这样做，因为不能保证所说的资源会掉落，并且您(至少)要有11个字符。

Every free-to-play game starts out with a fairly flat and simple progression curve. But the player will always arrive at a wall. That wall is a kind of test to see if the player is actually invested in continuing to play (or pay). But it’s not a single hurdle. It’s a periodic obstacle that never actually disappears.

每个免费游戏都以相当平坦且简单的进度曲线开始。但是玩家总是会碰壁。隔离墙是一种测试，可以查看玩家是否真正投入了继续玩(或付费)的投资。但这不是一个障碍。这是一个周期性的障碍，实际上永远不会消失。

Image for post — Marvel Strike Force. Source: Android Authority.

墙内墙 (Walls within walls)

Supporters of these free-to-play models will often say that skilled players don’t need to spend money; that they’re good enough to make sufficient progress without doing so. But this ties into another aspect of the design approach here: there are often multiple progress walls to climb. Once you’ve spent enough money or time on a game to get past the first wall, many basic tasks or challenges become easier.

这些免费游戏模式的支持者经常会说熟练的玩家不需要花钱；他们足够擅长在没有这样做的情况下取得足够的进步。但这与这里设计方法的另一个方面息息相关：通常有多个进度墙需要攀爬。一旦您在游戏上花费了足够的金钱或时间来超越第一堵墙，许多基本任务或挑战就会变得更加容易。

During my time in Marvel Strike Force, I routinely earned free materials because my team had progressed enough to complete special challenges. Arknights takes a similar approach, where daily events produce better and better rewards as you complete harder challenges.

在Marvel Strike Force期间 ，我经常获得免费的材料，因为我的团队已经取得了足够的进步以完成特殊挑战。 《方舟骑士》采用了类似的方法，当您完成更艰巨的挑战时，日常事件会产生越来越好的回报。

Breaking through that first progress wall is the equivalent of getting a massive weight off your shoulders. It’s the point where players become committed to a game. The first wall is, by design, tougher to clear than subsequent walls partly for this reason. This is where the sunk cost fallacy is fully realized: “I can’t stop playing, look how far I’ve come.” Once a player reaches this point, the chance that they will retain a longer-term commitment to the game increases substantially.

突破第一道进展墙，就等于将巨大的负担从肩膀上移开了。这是玩家致力于游戏的关键所在。根据设计，第一壁要比后续壁更难清除。这是完全实现沉没成本谬误的地方：“我不能停止游戏，看看我走了多远。” 一旦玩家达到这一点，他们保留对游戏的长期承诺的机会就会大大增加。

The dirty secret here, though, is that there’s always another wall. Once the player has cleared the first wall and is committed, they’ll be motivated to keep making progress. Making said progress requires — you guessed it — more grinding, or more spending money.

不过，这里的肮脏秘密是， 总有一堵墙 。一旦玩家清除了第一堵墙并做出了承诺，他们就会被激励继续前进。要取得上述进展，就需要(您猜到了)更多的努力或更多的花钱。

A free-to-play game that runs out of grinding is a dead game. That’s precisely why these titles are designed around long term play and continual updates.

精疲力尽的免费游戏是一场无用的游戏。这就是为什么这些标题围绕长期播放和不断更新而设计的原因。

The beauty of continually scaling content is that there’s no such thing as running out of numbers. Every free-to-play game imaginable has some system that could be extended indefinitely. In Marvel Strike Force, the developers kept the rarity system static, but raised the max character level from 70 to 75. These five additional levels cost substantial in-game currency to make the jump in one go.

不断扩展内容的好处在于，不会出现数字用完的情况。可以想象的每个免费游戏都有一些可以无限期扩展的系统。在Marvel Strike Force中 ，开发人员将稀有系统保持不变，但将最大角色级别从70增加到75。这五个额外级别花费了巨大的游戏货币才能一举完成。

Character-driven games may take things further by requiring additional grinding to unlock a character, and then restarting that grind for each new character the player unlocks.

角色驱动的游戏可能需要进一步的磨合才能解锁角色，然后再为玩家解锁的每个新角色重新开始磨合。

可疑的未来 (Questionable future)

As someone who studies game design, some of these free-to-play experiences frustrate me because they may have legitimately great systems that can be severely undercut by the monetization model (or, more specifically, the way it is implemented in a given case).

作为研究游戏设计的人，其中一些免费游戏体验令我感到沮丧，因为它们可能拥有合法的强大系统，这些系统可能会被货币化模型(或更确切地说，在给定案例中的实现方式)严重削弱。。

The elements I complain about — the grind, the repetitive tasks, the lack of evolving game systems — these are all intentional on the part of the designer. Arknights, for example, has great potential as a character-driven tower defense game. But the elements surrounding it are frustrating. What’s more, the core gameplay systems in many of these games are so heavily tied to their monetization models that there’s no way to produce a “retail version” without requiring an entire redesign.

我抱怨的元素-磨碎，重复的任务，缺乏不断发展的游戏系统-这些都是设计者故意设计的。例如，《 方舟骑士》作为角色驱动的塔防游戏具有巨大的潜力。但是围绕它的元素令人沮丧。而且，许多这类游戏的核心游戏系统都与获利模型紧密相关，以至于无法在无需重新设计的情况下生产“零售版”。

There must surely be a reasonable middle ground between the traditional retail experience and the free-to-play mobile model.

在传统的零售体验和免费的移动模式之间一定要有合理的中间立场。

Before the pandemic threw the planet under a bus in 2020, there were some active conversations occurring at various levels aimed at cracking down on free-to-play games in terms of their addictive nature. And on a personal level, I’d made a promise to myself that I outright refuse to play any video game that demands my constant time or money to enjoy it. Personally, I think it’s a matter of when and not if governments begin to discuss the subject again. And when that day comes, some developers (and their customers) could be left scrambling.

在2020年大流行把大行星扔下公共汽车之前，有许多活跃的对话在各个层次上进行，目的是从成瘾性方面打击免费游戏。在个人层面上，我向自己保证，我会完全拒绝玩任何需要我不断投入时间或金钱来享受游戏的视频游戏。就个人而言，我认为这取决于何时以及是否要再次开始讨论该主题。当这一天到来时，一些开发人员(及其客户)可能会争先恐后。

If you enjoyed this article, consider joining the Game-Wisdom Discord channel. It’s open to everyone.

如果您喜欢本文，请考虑加入 Game-Wisdom Discord频道 。 它向所有人开放。