让我痛苦了七年的问题，某天明白了

乐天灵魂

Chris Crawford on gamedesign:
Chapter 3.1 history of play
Play certainly started out simply enough. Early mammals learned to play as a way of polishing the complex neural circuitry that they were born with. A young colt has most of the circuitry in place to walk and to run, but getting everything coordinated with the sense of balance, the visual field, and internal neural inputs takes a certain amount of practice, which is accomplished through a form of play known as gamboling.
//最初的游戏当然很简单。小动物生下来就学会把游戏作为一种途径，来培养复杂的神经系统。一匹小马已经具有了大部分走和跑的神经系统，但是为了让内在的神经和平衡感协调，和视野协调，它通过“跳来跳去”来让这一切都协调起来。
Jumping, dancing, darting, and running in young herbivores are immediately recognizable as play, yet they serve the deadly serious purpose of learning the fine points of maneuvering in a world full of predators.
//跳跃，小碎步，飞奔，奔跑，年轻的草食类动物就这样玩耍。他们这样玩耍是因为他们要学习这个充满了肉食动物世界的生存规则。
The hunting mammals took the process even further, using play as a means of honing their hunting skills. The stalking, pouncing, wrestling games that felines play are all exercises meant to learn the skills of the hunt.
捕食类动物更加深入地学习这个过程，把玩看成是对捕食技能的训练。围捕，突袭，摔跤游戏，猫科动物在玩中学会了所有的捕食技能。

But humans took the concept of play the furthest. Lord knows they had to—with infants popping out of the womb several years before they were truly ready to take on the world, they needed every opportunity to learn the complex skills necessary to survive.
//但是人类把玩发挥的更加淋漓尽致。这些地球的统治者们从出生的那一刻起，就需要在之后的数年中学习复杂的生存技能。

欢迎使用百度搜索“乐天灵魂”来访问my blog
本人选择游戏设计作为终生职业，在10年之后，我要加入blizzard设计游戏。
通过漫长的思考设计出伟大的游戏，我想这就是上帝令我存在的意义。
欢迎热爱游戏的朋友们一起来交流，如果你是第一次来到我的blog，推荐你阅读“乐天灵魂的个人简介”。希望我们成为朋友：）

冰魄幽蓝

如果你懂一些程序，至少懂一点点的话，我想你不会设计出让程序想抽你的东西。
而如果你什么都不懂，估计有一天你所在的公司的程序们，会拿着菜刀在街上向你示爱～～
一个策划设计出来的东西，首先必须是可行的，而且是完全可实现的。
当然我们不可能要求一个策划多么的精通程序的编写，可这不代表一个策划就不应该懂得一些最基本的程序知识。

——想象如果一个游戏有240个程序员来编，没有策划没有美工会怎样？
想象一下一个游戏有24000可策划和美工，可是没有一个程序会怎样？

——你肯定不能设计游戏，如果你不会玩的话。
你肯定不是一个优秀的游戏设计师，如果你不懂程序的话。

——我想是成为不了一个游戏策划的，就算他编程再好，跑起来的游戏和组成它的程序完全不是一回事。
我想是成为不了一个优秀策划的，就算他的想法再好，如果不是在程序可实现的基础上一切都是空想。

——在郑渊洁写童话之前，他一直在读各种课外书，他得到了什么？
在郑渊洁读各种课外书之前，他首先是在学习每个汉字，他得到了什么？

——在泰森打拳击之前，他一直在街头打架，他得到了什么？
在泰森开始打架之前，他必须先学会怎样合理挥舞他的拳头，他得到了什么？

——如果太过于功利性，我们会把自己的前途引向一个较为狭窄的范围
这才是这本书所要告诉你的，可惜你完全理解错了。

madmonkey

又被忽悠了

楼主继续思考7年吧

不懂程序是不行的,主要在逻辑和算法上.美术也是,要会鉴赏,知道一些原理.

但是对于"玩"这个问题,倒是同意.

水寒三尺

乐天灵魂: Re: Re:让我痛苦了七年的问题，某天明白了


如果你很善于在观点不同的时候与对方进行言语攻击，而非道理探讨的时候，恭喜你，你非常有到以搞人际关系为主的公司去做策划的潜质。

有句老话，跟鬼讲鬼话，跟人讲人话
仅此而已

乐天灵魂

Chris Crawford on gamedesign
Charpter 3 Play

LESSON 4
Good games do not simulate physical reality; they mirror emotional reality.
//
好的游戏不应该仅仅模仿事物表面，它们应该折射出内在的真实情感。



Sadly, the current mania for photo-realistic graphic detail has distracted us from the power of metaphor. Games are now designed with acute attention to every graphic detail, and our continuing successes in this direction have only encouraged this misdirected attention. There remains a huge opportunity here for games that operate in a metaphorical sense, rather than the overly explicit works now in vogue. A game should not be a mere stripped-down version of a simulation; it can reach far into the weird world of human emotional associations to find its truth.
//
不幸的是，现在流行的图形高细节仿真游戏使得我们远离“隐喻”。游戏把我们的注意力都集中在了每个画面的细节上，每一次任务胜利我们都仅仅为这些画面而欢呼。但是还存在着很多机会，能够用隐喻来处理，胜于现在流行的直接展示。一个游戏不应该仅仅像被逐个剥开皮，从外到里暴露的东西；而应该给人们更多的情感联想，让人们联想到这个世界的神秘现象，从而找到真相。
（下一帖是对该段文字的具体解释，你也可以直接访问atian.dpnet.com.cn看更多的翻译文章）

乐天灵魂

Play Is Metaphorical
//游戏就是隐喻
All play in some sense represents something from the non-play universe. We often confuse this metaphorical aspect of play as simulation. Play is not necessarily a simulation of anything in particular, but it does generate mental associations with real-world issues. In many cases, those associations are in fact generated by means of simulation. For example, a flight simulation allows us to play at flying, and it does so by presenting us with a careful simulation of the experience of piloting an aircraft. But simulation is a small part of a larger picture; metaphor is the broader term that more completely expresses this aspect of the nature of play.
//
“玩”这一行为总能表现出严酷的世界中的一些东西。我们经常把游戏的隐喻性混淆作是仿真性。玩不一定是某件特定事物的仿真，但是它确实通过一些现实规则来和现实保持联系。在很多情况下，这些联系实际上是用仿真来表现的。比如，一个飞行仿真游戏可以让我们仿真飞行，表现方式是给我们提供一种小心翼翼地驾驶飞机的模拟经验。但是仿真只是冰山一角；隐喻才是冰山的主体，它才能完整地表达出来玩的本质。

A good example of this is provided by the series of combat flight simulators designed by Larry Holland for LucasArts Games in the early 1990s (BattleHawks, Battle of Britain, and Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe). These games deliberately magnified combat results to heighten the emotional intensity of the game. You could shoot down half a dozen enemy aircraft in a single mission. These results were, of course, wildly unrealistic; many fighter pilots went through the entire war without shooting down a single aircraft. But an accurate simulation of World War II fighter combat would have been dreadfully boring. You'd take off, fly for several hours to the combat zone, hear all sorts of excitement over the radio, fly around looking for enemy aircraft, and when you found some, there would either be too many (in which case you dared not approach) or too few (in which case they would run as you approached). Very rarely would you chance upon an encounter with even enough odds to entice both sides to accept battle, and even then the chances of actually making a hit, much less a kill, were low. After many hours sweating in the freezing cold, you'd return home empty-handed.
That's what a simulation would show. But a game is another matter; it must model the emotional realities of air combat, and from that point of view, all the missed opportunities and eventless hours are non-entities. The only thing that matters is shooting and being shot at; therefore, a good air combat game will twist reality around to emphasize the emotionally significant parts.
//
一个好的例子就是1990年代Larry Holland为LucasArts Games设计的仿真飞行战斗系列。这些游戏夸大了冲突以加强游戏情感。你也许能在一个单独的关中打下来半打飞机。这种情形当然是不现实的；很多飞行员在整个战争中也没有打下来过一架飞机！况且二战飞行员过的是更加枯燥的生活：起飞，飞了数小时到达战斗区域，从无线电中感受战斗的紧张，飞来飞去寻找敌机，当你发现了一些，可能太多（你不敢过去），也可能太少（它们在你过去的时候已经跑了）。有很小的概率你可以有打一场的机会，甚至是那时你可能造成的伤害远低于击落敌机。经历了数小时的紧张后，你一无所获地回到停机坪。这就是仿真游戏应该表现得。但是一个游戏却是另一回事；它应该体现空战的情感经验，那些丢掉的机会和无所事事的数小时并不是重点。重点是开火和被击中；因此，一个好的空战游戏应该把能够刺激情感的部分夸大数倍以上。
欢迎用百度搜索乐天灵魂，访问更多英文文章翻译

冰魄幽蓝

o(?o?)o原来楼主是做在线翻译的捏~~~~

乐天灵魂

Consider, for another example, the old classic game Space Invaders. This game cannot be said to simulate anything from our experience. There have never been arrays of little space monsters marching back and forth across the sky, slowly closing in on us. Nor is such a situation even plausible. Space Invaders simulates nothing. I see in this game not a simulation but an excellent metaphor for the frustrations of the individual in our society. All the social rules and institutions are arrayed against us; they march in lockstep as they threaten to suffocate us.
//考虑一下另一个例子。 老版本的太空入侵者。这个游戏并未模拟我们的任何现实经验。空中也从来没有任何排成队的太空怪物慢慢地向我们移动。这也不是一个似是而非的例子；太空入侵者并没有模拟任何东西。我在这个游戏中看到的不是模拟，而是个人和他面临的许多挫折的斗争，这是一种隐喻。所有的社会的规则和制度在制约着我们；它们因循守旧，渐渐地向我们走来，威胁到我们的存在。
They rain their nasty poop onto our heads; we can only dodge them. But we do have one gun with which to shoot back, and if we dodge quickly, we can defeat them. It's a compelling metaphor for the predicament with which we all struggle; that's why it was such a huge success. Even more interesting is the fact that there were many, many variations and improvements upon the basic design, and none of them caught on like the original. The designers of these imitations tweaked the components of the design, but they lost the power of the metaphor.
//它们把污浊的思想倾倒向我们；我们只能躲开它们。但是我们在游戏中有一支枪可以还击，如果我们躲的很快，我们可以战胜它们。这是对我们将要克服的困境的一种隐喻；这就是为什么这个游戏获得了空前的成功！更有趣的是这样的事实：在这个游戏之后，有很多的变种；但是没有一个像最初的版本那样成功了。那些版本的设计者把设计的思路变来变去，但是却失去了隐喻的力量。

更多英文文章：atian.dpnet.com.cn

乐天灵魂

冰魄幽蓝: Re:让我痛苦了七年的问题，某天明白了

o(?o?)o原来楼主是做在线翻译的捏~~~~

我只是想和大家探讨一些道理，不期望有很多人支持我或者怎么样，只是希望单纯地探讨作游戏的道理，而非互相攻击，贬低，等等。
厄，还一段。把这段翻完就该上班了@@
我不知道在这个业内论坛有多少人向我当初看到这些文字的时候感到震惊，或者说是欣喜；小弟的英文很烂，如果是这个问题那也就不用提了。
我的意思就是，希望和大家探讨一些类似的道理，或者交换一些相互的资料。
小弟翻译文章已经半年左右了，只翻译游戏相关的，呵呵，希望和Chris Crawford的fans一起多交流
atian.dpnet.com.cn，留言必回~~~~

乐天灵魂

A similar case can be made for another old classic: Pac-Man. There had been plenty of maze-chase games before Pac-Man, and many afterward, but none seemed to have the emotional power of that particular combination of design characteristics. It can't be due to any success or failure in simulation—Pac-Man doesn't simulate anything! What Pac-Man captures so well is the frantic nature of our working lives. We rush about, collecting some meaningless dots (carrying out our daily tasks), while bad guys chase us, just waiting to trip us up on some minor mistake. It's frantic, it's mechanical, it's relentless—it's just like our daily lives. There were plenty of variations on the Pac-Man design, but none of them got the metaphor to hit home so closely.

//
还有另外一个比较简单的例子：派克人（好像是迷宫吃豆子的那个小游戏译者注）。在派克人之前，有很多迷宫游戏，在之后也有很多。但是没有一个表达了像派克人那样的情感力量。这不能归于仿真，派克人没有模仿过任何东西！派克人捕获的其实是一些毫无意义的圆点（就向我们每天的工作），当那个坏蛋碰到我们的时候，就像我们犯了一些小错误的时候。这很疯狂，这很呆板，这是无情的------就像我们每天的生活。在派克人上也有很多变种，可是没有一个像最初的那样抓住了要点。