Mr.Chris Crawford的游戏策划设计文档

泛凡

此书已有中文版，呵呵

乐天灵魂

泛凡: Re:Chris Crawford on game design(translate by Letian)

此书已有中文版，呵呵

我之所以决定从头翻译此书，原因有两个：

1 在我的blog（atian.dpnet.com.cn）上面可以看到，我曾经对国外gamasutra网上50余篇的新闻进行翻译。后来我发现，新闻仅仅描述现象而未讲述其内在的道理，于是我决定要翻译一篇名著之类的书。

2 国内的很多翻译似是而非，有的人没有玩过游戏去翻游戏书籍，效果可想而知。在其它的领域也有类似的情况，所以最好还是自己能够做翻译。

在这种翻译中，我是否有所收获呢？不但锻炼了自己的表达，而且已经对我的职业生涯产生了明显的推动作用。一些过于功利的行为是不会有这样的效果的。我可以想象一个小企业的老板会怎么说：“你做这个翻译有什么用？你得到了什么？有人付钱给你吗？”

哦，我都忘了，小老板们一般都不看书了。
他们会这样说：“外国人在毒害我们！在侵略我们，别看那个。你得脑子有问题，听我的就对了。”
于是他们成功地禁锢了听话的员工的思想。

乐天灵魂

第六章，交互性interactivity
LESSON 11
Interactivity is the essence of what you are selling.

Let me present the argument in the language of business.

Interactivity is the "basis of competitive advantage" of

the computer. Sure, the computer can do a lot of things,

but the one thing that it does better than any of the

competing media is interactivity. And the wise

businessman always throws his resources behind his basis

of competitive advantage.

You aren't convinced? Okay, how about a military maxim:

"Fight on the ground of your own choosing." The wise

general offers battle only on the terrain best suited to

the strengths of his forces and takes maximum advantage

of the weaknesses of his opponent. If his biggest

advantage is in cavalry, he will choose to fight on flat

open ground where the cavalry can do its job best. Sure,

he'll fight with his infantry and artillery, too, but

the tactical primacy will go to the cavalry.

So too it must be with interactivity. Yes, the computer

can do graphics and animation and sound, but these

capabilities are not the primary strength of the

computer. Interactivity is the real strength of the

computer, and it must be given primacy in our designs.

None of this suggests that graphics, animation, and

sound should be eliminated from our designs. These are

necessary supporting elements in the overall design. The

better we are able to marshal them to heighten

interactivity, the more successful our designs will be.

But necessity does not convey equality. The ability to

use a keyboard is absolutely necessary to a programmer,

but typing skill is nowhere near as important to good

programming as clear thinking.

第十一课
交互性才是你的卖点。

   让我把这个观点用商业语言来描述一下。交互性是电脑的“核心竞争力

”。当然，电脑能够做很多其它的事情，但是它比任何媒体做的都更好的

就是它的交互性。聪明的商人通常都是用他所拥有资源的最与众不同之处

来赚钱。

    你不确信？好的，看看这条军事格言：“在你自己选择的格斗地点战

斗”。 聪明的将军总是选择一个地点，这个地点能淋漓尽致地发挥部队的

长处，并把部队的短处掩盖起来。如果将军拥有众多骑兵，他就会选择在

开阔平坦的土地上战斗，这里能够发挥骑兵的最佳优势。当然，他也会用
步兵和炮兵，但是战术的核心是骑兵。

     不错，电脑拥有的核心优势就是交互性。尽管电脑能够处理图片，

音频，动画，但是这些能力并不是电脑的核心，交互性才是电脑的真正强

势的力量，它应该在你的设计中首要考虑到。
  
     这个建议并非是说图片，动画，音效就应该从你的设计中删除了。

这些资源都是设计的必要组成部分。我们越是能够把各种资源整合好，以

突出交互性，我们的设计就越出色。但是必要并非意味着平等。能够在键

盘上打字的能力对于一个程序员来说非常之必要，但是在编程中，打字无

论如何都没有清晰的思考来得重要。

Other Attributes of the Computer

There exists within the game design community a school

of thought that holds interactivity to be nothing more

than a useful component in the design of entertainment

software. According to this school, the computer is a

wondrous tool offering a variety of capabilities, such

as graphics, animation, music, and sound. Interactivity

is seen as just another capability to be used or

neglected according to the tastes and intentions of the

designer.

The one thing that computers can unquestionably do

better than anything else is interactivity. And they do

it much, much better than any other medium. They

internalize the rules, carry out calculations, permit

immensely more complicated behaviors, and present the

results far better than any other medium. Many years

ago, before computers were available, somebody published

a board air combat game. That's right, a flight sim done

on paper. The game was technically successful in that it

did, after all, present air combat in a functional

manner. But it was a failure in terms of gameplay; it

didn't feel at all like flying an airplane.



电脑的其它属性

   在学校的游戏设计教育中，存在着这样的想法：认为交互性不过是设

计娱乐性的软件而已。对于这种想法来说，电脑仅仅是一个多样化资源的

提供工具，这些资源包括图片，动画，音乐和音效。交互性被作为另一种

属性来考虑，并且认为并非是游戏设计师考虑的能力。

   毫无疑问，电脑拥有的任何工具都无法比拟的特性就是交互性。在这

一点上，它比其它媒体做的要好得太多了。电脑把规则封装在内部，进行

运算，允许大量复杂的行为，并且输出结果，这是其它媒体都做不到的。

很多年以前，在没有电脑的时候，有人制作过一个纸上飞行棋游戏。对，

在纸上进行虚拟的飞行游戏。当时这个游戏非常成功，毕竟，用一种功能

性的方式来模拟飞行战斗。但是在游戏性上却是一个失败的作品；玩这个

游戏的时候，根本没有驾驶飞机的感觉。

So What Is Interactivity?

I have written an entire book on the subject of interactivity (The Art of Interactive Design, No Starch Press, 2002), and I suggest that you consult that book for more material on interactivity. However, I will present here a quickie synopsis of the core concepts.

There is one common experience we all share that is truly, fundamentally, interactive: a conversation. If you take some time to consider carefully the nature of conversations, you'll come to a clearer understanding of interactivity. A conversation, in its simplest form, starts out with two people. I'll call them Joe and Fred. The conversation begins when Joe expresses something to Fred. At this point, the ball is in Fred's corner. He performs three steps in order to hold up his end of the conversation:

Fred listens to what Joe has to say. He expends the energy to pay attention to Joe's words. He gathers in all of Joe's words and assembles them into a coherent whole.

Fred thinks about what Joe said. He considers, contemplates, and cogitates. The wheels turn as Fred develops his response to Joe's statement.

Fred expresses his response back to Joe. He formulates the words and speaks them.

Now the tables are turned; the ball is in Joe's court. Joe must listen to what Fred says; Joe must think about it and develop a reaction; then Joe must express his reaction back to Fred. This process goes back and forth until the participants terminate it. Thus, a conversation is a cyclic process in which each participant in turn listens, thinks, and speaks.

We can generalize the example of the conversation to get a definition of interactivity:

A cyclic process in which two active agents alternately (and metaphorically) listen, think, and speak.



究竟什么是交互性？

   我曾经写过一本关于交互性的书（交互性设计艺术2002），我建议你

可以去读一读那本书来学习更多关于交互性的知识。尽管这样，我还是会

在这里大概地讲述一下交互性的基本概念。

    这是一个我们在日常生活中感受过的，真实和基本的一个交互性的例

子：对话。如果你花些时间认真地考虑一下对话，你会得到一个对交互性

更加清晰的理解。对话，最简单的形式就是在两个人之间发生的。假定是

Joe和Fred。在Joe想要表达一些意思给Fred的时候，对话发生了。然后

，该Fred讲话了。Fred用三个步骤来完成对话：

1 Fred听Joe在说什么。他集中精力听Joe的话。他把所有Joe话中的单

词集中起来，成为一个整体。

2 Fred思考Joe说了什么。他反复地思考。当Fred想要表达他的感受给

Joe的时候，Fred就要开始讲话了。

3 Fred把他的反映回馈给Joe。他把要说的话整理好，然后把这些话说出

来。

  现在又该Joe讲话了。Joe听Fred的话；Joe思考并且反应过来；然后Joe把他的感受表达给Fred。这个过程反反复复，直到参与者停下来。从而，对话就是由“听，思考，说”三个不断反复的过程组成的。

   我们可以整理对话的例子来得到一个关于交互性的定义：
   在两个实体之间发生的一个循环的交替过程，这个过程包括听，思考和说。
   



   
    atian.dpnet.com.cn ,welcome!

godsun2008

直接在希望版翻译上修改就可以了。。

blizzard不接受中国国籍的雇员，要想去blizzard，建议先出国读一个game design的学位，比如USC的，然后搞到绿卡，这样才有机会。如果你是美术或程序，就没这么多限制了，因为外包公司直接在中国设立，并不需要出国，像暴雪、EA、微软皆如此，但他们不接收国内的游戏策划。

另外，对游戏设计新人而言，理论确实没什么用，需要掌握一定实际能力以后再去看才有深刻的认识。一个看了四十本外版书和几百篇文章的废柴给你诚恳的建议。：）

工作狂

[em17]英语好就是爽呀。。。。马上还我那几个手册连魔兽手册也要（换成中文版） [em21]

再次奸笑一下

乐天灵魂

godsun2008: Re:Chris Crawford on game design(translate by Letian)

直接在希望版翻译上修改就可以了。。

blizzard不接受中国国籍的雇员，要想去blizzard，建议先出国读一个...

1 读了多少书和懂了多少本完全是两码事。
  经典值得一读再读，我在翻译中收获了很多以前略读的时候没有发现的

思想和表达方式。
2 Blizzard是我永远的梦想，哪怕在那里做一个游戏测试，我也心甘情

愿。Blizzard网上的招聘启事你看过吗？哪里有要求中国国籍的条件？
下面我转一则www.blizzard.com上面的招聘启事（原链接：http://www.blizzard.com/jobopp/level-designer.shtml）：
Level Designer

Blizzard Entertainment is looking for a talented level

designer with experience building levels using any

popular 3D Real-Time Strategy game toolset (Warcraft 3,

Rise of Legends, Command and Conquer, etc). The ideal

candidate has industry experience on a shipping game, or

has created and distributed levels in the fan/mod

community. Level designers need to be able to create fun

and interesting environments that look and play great.

Samples of your work should be submitted along with a

resume and cover letter. Please include a breakdown for

each level that describes what you did (layout,

modeling, textures, lighting, triggers, etc.). If you do

not have existing work, you will be required to create a

level using the Warcraft 3 World Editor.

Requirements


Absolute Passion for playing and making computer games.
Experience creating levels in 3D RTS game toolset

(Warcraft 3, Rise of Legends, etc)
Great sense for what makes a game or level fun to play.
Ability to make an artistically interesting environment

using textures, height and doodads
Must be able to do limited scripting or using triggers

in game toolset.
Ability to work well in a team environment

对应翻译：关卡设计师：
暴雪娱乐正在招聘能够使用任何设计3d实时游戏的关卡设计师。能够使用

编辑器（魔兽争霸3，Rise of Legends，命令与征服等）。你需要有在

一个已经发行了的游戏上面工作过的经历，或者在公开的游戏中设计过关

卡。关卡设计师需要设计具有游戏性和有趣的关卡环境，让玩家能够陶醉

其中。你的工作应该在简历中被概括总结。请给出一个细目分类，说明你

在每个关卡中做了什么（界面，建模，材质，触发器，色彩明暗，等等。

）如果你没有过这些工作，你可以用W3的世界编辑器来制作一个。

需要：
玩和制作电脑游戏的能力。
在3D即时游戏中使用过编辑器的经验（魔兽争霸3，Rise of Legends，命令与征服等）
拥有非常强烈的设计游戏的感觉。
能够建立起一个有艺术感的关卡，包括材质，大小和其中的各种部件设置。
在游戏设计中，必须使用脚本语言或者触发器设置。
团队协作能力。
-----------我是分隔线-----------------------------------
  我们每个人都有梦想，可是在我们年轻的时候，有时候会被小老板们利用，不是每个人都能醒悟，有些策划就莫名其妙地被小老板变成了程序员，因为国内小老板们需要的是程序员而非游戏设计。他们仅仅是在盗版而已。这是国内很多小公司的现状。看看全球最著名的暴雪公司，又没有要求关卡设计师去编程？游戏设计师需要会什么流行的java？天天都在死记硬背那些Java标准？
  
  ok，关于这种现象，还想讨论的我下一帖子准备翻译的一篇，正好要涉及到这个问题，这个话题告一段落。
  
   有些人能够在某时欺骗一些人，但是经典名著之所以经典源自于这句真理的下一句话：没有人能够在同时欺骗所有的人。

   在去年魔兽世界刚刚开服的时候，我在二区海加尔服务器，总是能听说一些震惊服务器的事件，比如国内首down三大首领，国内首down克莱恩等等事件都发生在这样一个工会，她是由清华学生组成的一个公会：SMTH。

    一些小公会就把SMTH妖魔化，为了笼络自己的会员。当然进入SMTH也需要相对严格的手续，绝对不是想入就可以入的。当时是需要三个高级会员推荐，即使有人推荐，还需要进行问卷考核；最后才可以加入。

     我在去年的12月12日加入了SMTH，详细内容大家可以在atian.dpnet.com.cn中看到。我所感到的就是，一个大公会给你的决不是强迫你去做什么，那就是一种自由宽松的氛围，脱离了一些抢装备之类的低级趣味，而是追求更为高级的层次需求，而是做到最好！

     我们可不可以把现实中的，不断让我们震惊的Blizzard和虚拟世界
中的SMTH公会类比呢？我曾经在虚拟世界中走过这条路，我知道，我曾经来过这里。
   
     关于诸如我的梦想的话题我不会再在回帖中过多的讨论，让我们还是继续讨论一些在我们游戏设计专业的问题，下一章我会给大家带来更精彩的Chris Crawford的文章，希望大家都能够圆自己的梦：）

乐天灵魂

Chapter12 Random Sour Observations
Everybody's a Game Designer

Games are for kids, right? They're simple, easygoing fun, right? Ergo, anybody should be able to design them, right? WRONG! It takes lots of training and years of practice to become a good game designer. Surprise, surprise. Game design, like any other serious activity, requires expertise. Yet this simple lesson is lost on just about everybody. I don't know how many times I have seen executives butt into the game-design process, imposing their personal opinions on game designers who have had years of experience. I've seen QA testers try to pass off their own opinions on game design as bug reports. Beginning game designers at their first Game Developers Conference have waylaid me in the halls to lecture me on my purported design mistakes.

Such problems are usually little more than irritations, but when practiced by executives, they can have serious consequences. For example, in January of 2002, four executives launched an online games company with a novel revenue model. They offered substantial cash prizes to players who won their game. In truth, it was really a puzzle, not a game, but that's not relevant to this tale. What was striking about their company is that they didn't include an experienced game designer in their executive staff. They had a CEO, a marketing person, a CFO, and a CTO—but no game designer. Obviously, they figured that they could design the game themselves. The result was predictable: Their product was boring, very few customers signed up, and they pulled the plug after just two months on the market.

We can laugh at these clods because they wasted only their own money, but it's a different story when some sophomoric executive ruins a product by trying to play game designer. One of these jokers even boasted to me once that his ignorance of game design was a strength: Untainted by conventional thinking, he could think outside the box better than experienced game designers. Can you guess how his company came out?

On this point I will offer a word of praise to the larger games companies. The executives of established games companies seem content to leave the game design to, well, game designers. Perhaps they're just too busy cutting big deals, or counting their stock options, but one way or the other, they've got the right idea.

A variation on this is the programmer who thinks he can design a game because he can write a program. The most celebrated exponent of this view is John Carmack, creator of Doom, Quake, and other bloodthirsty exercises in nihilism. John is reported to have declared that "game creation is 99% programming and 1% game design." His declaration is certainly consistent with his design philosophy, because he has no design philosophy. He simply implements other peoples' game designs better than they do. The ploy has made John rich, famous, and widely respected among games programmers, so I cannot dispute its efficacy. Indeed, if you're as good a programmer as John Carmack (and as bad a designer), then you should do the same thing.

Be advised, however, that the super-duper graphics algorithms that made John's fame have now been supplanted by superior algorithms implemented directly in silicon. Nowadays, any clumsy slob of a programmer can simply use a few hardware calls to perform amazing graphics tricks far beyond anything John built his reputation on. No dummy he, we can be certain that John Carmack has stayed ahead of the game, developing even more brilliant algorithms always better than what the hardware can do. Someday soon, however, video display hardware will become so powerful that John and his acolytes will find themselves clawing for marginal performance gains that nobody cares about. ("Brand X models only 10,000 hairs on a person's head, but our technology offers 20,000!") Meanwhile, the real game designers will still have plenty of exciting challenges on their plates.



Charpter 12 随时保持观察
每个人都是游戏设计师

   游戏就是给小孩的，对吗？他们很简单，很容易让人开心起来，对吗

？所以，每个人都能做游戏设计师喽？对吗？不对！需要很多年的培训和

很多年的经验才能够成为一个游戏设计师。惊讶吧，惊讶吗？游戏设计，

就像很多其它严肃的活动一样，需要经验。却没有人注意到这简单的一点

。我不知道有多少次看到一个一无所知的人想要介入游戏设计过程，向一

个有经验的游戏设计师表达他们在游戏设计上面的看法。我曾经看过游戏

测试员想要用设计游戏的方式来取代他们的bug报告。在第一届游戏设计

开发大会上，有个人直接找到我，来向我指出我的游戏中的设计错误。

   这些问题通常来说仅仅让人愤怒而已。但是当公司高级主管这样干时

，他们会导致一些更为严重的后果。比如，在2002年1月份，4个高级管理

人员组织了一个游戏公司。他们直接给赢了的玩家提供奖金。事实上，这

是一场智力竞赛，而不是一个游戏。它们完全不相干。他们的问题就在于

，公司里一个有游戏设计经验的人都没有。他们有一个CEO，市场主管，

一个CFO和一个CTO，但是没有游戏设计师。很显然，他们认为他们自己能
设计游戏。最后的结果很容易猜到：他们的产品让人厌倦，很少的顾客购

买，最后在投入市场两个月后，公司倒闭。

   我们嘲笑这些人，因为他们浪费的只不过是他们的钱。但是当一些对

游戏一知半解的人对游戏设计师横加干涉的时候，这可不仅仅是一个故事

了。一个我曾经见过的厚颜无耻的人，曾经跟我说，他对于游戏的无知是

他的长处：毫无杂念的思考。他思考的比那些有经验的游戏设计师更好，

因为他是局外人。你能猜到最后这家公司怎样了吗？

   在这个观点上，我对于大型游戏公司更加赞赏。有些大型的公司高管

根本不过问游戏设计师的事情，或许因为他们太忙了，或者在考虑资金，

无论如何，这样做是对的。

   还有一个问题就在于，程序员认为他们能够设计游戏，因为他写过代

码。把这点发挥到了极致的就是John Carmack，充满血腥练习的Doom，

Quake的创造者。John曾经这么说：“游戏创作就是百分之一的游戏设计

加上百分之九十九的程序设计。”他的理论很符合他的实践，因为他没有

设计经验。他确实比当时的其他人的游戏卖得好。这使得John富有，闻名

，并且这种程序员设计游戏的模式广泛得到推崇。对此我毫不怀疑。但是

，如果你是一个像John那样差劲的设计师，同时又是他那么高超的程序员

，你也可以做一样的事情。

    仔细想想，现在John曾经赖以成名的那种漂亮的超级图片效果，就

连一个白痴都能用高效的图形工具轻而易举地做出来。毫无疑问，我们应

该能够断定John当时处于时代技术突破的前列，使用的图形算法超越了当

时的硬件。很快地，视频已经能关键发展让John和他的追随者的领域变得

狭窄。他们会这样宣称：（BrandX模型仅仅能显示一个人头上的一万根头

发，而我们的技术能够产生两万根！）与此同时，游戏设计师仍旧在他们

的领域面临很多激动人心的挑战。
   
      
atian.dpnet.com.cn,welcome!

乐天灵魂

工作狂: Re: Chris Crawford on game design(translate by Letian)

[em17]英语好就是爽呀。。。。马上还我那几个手册连魔兽手册也要（换成中文版） [em21]

再次奸笑一下

阿。。等我翻译完Chris Crawford on game design，有空就给你翻译那个，我去加班了。。@@

乐天灵魂

Chapter6 Interactivity

Is More Interactivity Better?

Now I turn to a more difficult question: If

interactivity is accorded primacy in entertainment

software design, then is not more interactivity better

than less interactivity? Put more baldly, is a more

interactive product better than a less interactive

product? I think so.

My first argument in favor of greater interactivity

relies on the primacy of interactivity. Since

interactivity is the basis of competitive advantage of

the computer, it is only fit and proper that we should

emphasize it. The more we emphasize interactivity in our

designs, the more fully we utilize the true strength of

the computer as an artistic medium.

Consider the cinema by way of example. Very roughly

speaking, and all other factors being equal, the more

cinematic a movie is, the better the movie. We can argue

long and hard over the precise definition of

"cinematic," but surely we can agree that it involves

the special capabilities of the camera to capture

motion, to pan, zoom, and move, to cut between scenes,

and so forth. Surely a movie that fails to use these

techniques will be inferior to a movie that does, other

factors being equal. Thus, we can say that a more

cinematic movie is superior to a less cinematic movie.

Of course, there are many exceptions to the general

rule: a poorly executed more cinematic movie is not

superior, and a movie whose artistic intent requires a

less cinematic style could still be a superior work.

There are other exceptions as well, but I think that the

general rule holds true.

An additional argument arises from the fact that the

interactive arts are still in their infancy. We have

just scratched the surface of this medium; we do not

fully understand interactivity. Our ignorance is

reflected in the body of work we have created. In the

vast universe of potential computer games, the set of

actual games that we have created lies crowded down in a

small corner, huddled together in common low

interactivity. Taking all of our computer games and

entertainments as a group, the amount of interactivity

that we offer is a faint and clumsy whisper of what

should be possible.

Perhaps a mathematical approach might better illuminate

my point. Imagine a scale of interactivity, running from

0 to 100 units of interactivity, with 100 representing

interactivity so intense that it lies beyond human

comprehension. Imagine all the games in the universe

placed on this scale. Now, in an ideal world, these

games would yield a bell curve, with a few

high-interactivity games, a few low-interactivity games,

and a great many games in the middle of the bell curve.

But we have not attained this ideal bell curve. Our

ignorance denies us the middle and upper portions of the

bell curve, constraining us to the lower end of the

curve. All of our work lies crowded down there.

This is my second reason why more interactivity is

better than less interactivity. We need to move up that

bell curve, to explore areas of interactivity that

previously have been inaccessible. The low end of the

scale is already heavily populated with designs; the

middle and upper reaches of the scale are empty. This is

why I hold a more interactive game in higher esteem than

a less interactive one. This is why I honor a designer

who goes where no designer has gone before more than one

who hews to more familiar territory.

Of course, when we have populated the bell curve more

fully, the day will come when some genius creates a game

that is too interactive. But that day is far distant.



第六章 交互性

更多的交互性，就更好吗？

   现在我转到一个更为困难的问题：如果说交互性在软件设计中应该排

在首位，那么，是不是说更多的交互性就一定比更少的交互性要好呢？更

坦率地说，是否具备更多交互性的产品就比更少交互性的产品要好呢？我

认为是的。
   
    我的第一个观点就是，让软件更具备交互性是交互性设计的基础。因

为交互性是电脑最为擅长的地方，所以我们应该以它为核心，这是合适的

，也是正确的。我们越是在我们的设计中加入更多的交互性，我们就越能

意识到电脑作为一种艺术媒体的力量。
   
    作为一个例子，让我们来考虑一下电影。大致说来，如果其它条件相

同，电影越是具备电影性，就越比其它电影要卖的好。我们关于如何定义

“电影性”，已经争论了很久。但是我们可以肯定，它包括电影捕获观众感

情的能力，剧情跌宕起伏，镜头切换，等等。很显然，一部部怎么使用这

些技术的电影就会比另一部充分利用了这些技术的电影差劲------当然是

在其它条件都相同的基础上。因此，我们可以这么认为，一个更具备电影

性的电影优于同类电影。当然，对于这条一般规则，还是存在例外的：一

个具备了电影性的电影不卖座，一个不具备电影性的电影却卖座。虽然存

在例外，但我认为这条规则是正确的。

    另外我源于事实的一个观点就是，交互性艺术仍然处于幼年期。我们
仅仅接触到了这种技术的表面；我们并不理解什么是交互性。我们的无知

在我们的作品中表现了出来。在那充满了各种可能的电脑游戏的宇宙，我

们已经开发出来了的游戏挤在这个宇宙的一个小小的角落，通常这些游戏

具备的交互性非常少。如果把所有我们的电脑游戏和娱乐作为一个组，其

中拥有交互性的也还做的远远不够。

    也许一个数学的方法更能够表达我的观点。想象一下，交互性的尺度

，从0到100个单位。100是人类能够达到的交互性的极限。想象一下把我

们的所有游戏放到这个尺度上。现在，在一个想象的刻度图表上，这些游

戏画出了一条弧线，上方是高度具备交互性的游戏，下方是一些低交互性

的游戏，还有很多在中间的普通游戏。但是我们无法获得这样的曲线。我

们的无知使得我们位于这条线的中部到下部。所有我们的工作塞满了那里

。
   
    这就是我的第二个观点：为什么更多的交互性比更少的交互性要好。

我们需要把这条线往上拉，来探索那些还未到达的交互性的区域。在这个

刻度的底部还充满着各种设计；中间到上面的刻度则是空的。这就使我为

什么要推崇高交互性设计。这就是我推崇的，一个设计者勇于探索更多的

区域，而不是固守在已有的，更加熟悉的区域。

    当然，我们让这条线更加丰富了，将来有些天才会创造出来一些太过

于具备交互性的游戏。但是要走的路还很长。



    atian.dpnet.com.cn -------welcome!

乐天灵魂

Chapter 12 Random Sour Observations

Young Males

Young men are the most dangerous and inventive creatures on the planet. A huge portion of the sum of human creation, be it artistic, technological, literary, or scientific, is attributable to young men. They have the drive, the reckless ambition, and the energy to pull off astounding feats. They are also the most dangerous driving group on the roads. They are far and away the largest source of violent crime. They are poorly socialized, testosterone-poisoned, and so driven that they have no sense of the possibility of failure.

It's no surprise that the field of computer gaming was created by young males. Nobody else would have had the balls to pour years of labor into a field that didn't exist, confident of eventual triumph. Nobody else would have plunged into a task about which he knew nothing whatever.

I was one of those early testosterone-poisoned fools. I didn't know anything about game design—hell, nobody did. That didn't stop me; I figured I would just make it up as I went along. I proudly, grandiloquently blundered my way forward, refusing to acknowledge my many failures but somehow learning from them. The huge database of idiotic mistakes I compiled now provides me with a sound foundation for game design wisdom.

The game design industry, however, has long since passed out of the early pioneering days. A multi-billion-dollar industry cannot operate on macho conceit and arrogance; it needs guidance by steadier, more prudent hands. Yet the industry remains dominated by young men. Partially it's a matter of turnover; there are so many young male fools willing to "break into the games biz" for a pittance that it's just too easy to dump overpaid oldsters and replace them with fresh young (and cheap) faces. Here's an industry that is twenty years old, in which the average creative worker has fewer than five years of experience.

The costs of this cheapness are evident everywhere we turn. Not least is the weak sense of community culture. With so many people coming and going, there is little opportunity to develop a stable set of community values. There are no calm older guys to rein in the young hotheads with cautions that "we don't do it that way." This in turn leads to an industry weak in moral constraints.

The contrast with the book publishing industry is striking. The book people have all been around for years and years; some of the publishers are more than a century old. Many are based in New York City and they all know each other. Untoward behavior is quickly reported through the community grapevine; jerks and rogues are shut out. Competition is certainly not lacking; these people operate on tight margins and sweat every nickel. But they do so with a sense of decency and honor that is entirely missing from the games industry. As with Hollywood, the book publishing industry has its own special set of warts, but on the matter of industry values, the games industry has much to learn from the book publishing industry.

The games industry has been evolving a mechanism for coping with this problem: It has bifurcated into two groups, the publishers and the developers. The publishers are staffed with older fellows who have stuck around for a while. They have their own internal culture that guides them. The young men are all routed into the development houses, where their barbaric behavior is channeled in productive directions. The development houses come and go with a velocity that would astound conventional corporations. I have given up keeping track of development houses; their lifetimes are too short to make the effort worth the candle.

The games industry is an industry by, for, and of young males. This is great for young males, but if and when the industry decides to grow up and out, it will need a broader talent base.

第十二章 随时随地都可以观察

第八节 年轻男人

    年轻男人是地球上最危险的，同时也是最具备创造性的生物。一大批

年轻的男人在艺术，技术，文化，或者科学上面留下他们的创作。他们有

激情，有着不计后果的干劲，还有着努力赢得令人惊叹的成绩的拼搏能力

。他们也是最为危险的一群；他们是暴力犯罪主体。他们的社会化程度较

低，雄性激素中毒，使得失败的可能性对于他们来说不算什么。

    计算机游戏领域是由年轻男人建立起的，这点毫无疑问。没有其他人

能够像这样把精力全部投入到这样的一块未被开发的区域，并且在最后取

得了成功。没有其他人会跳到他以前完全不了解的区域中来。

    我就是这群雄性激素中毒的人中间的一个。我在早期根本不知道什么

是游戏设计------没有人知道这个。但是这并没有阻止我的前进；我想我

能够在我前进的过程中去学习它。我自豪地，大摇大摆同时又跌跌撞撞地

走过我自己的路，拒绝认识到我的很多失败，尽管我可以从其中的一些学

习。我所拥有的庞大的错误数据库为我建立了智慧的游戏设计的基础。

     游戏设计工业，尽管艰难，在早期的先驱者之后已经有了长足的进

步。一个动辄数百万美元的工业不能再用年轻男人的傲慢和无知来决定如

何去做了；它需要更谨慎，严谨的态度。现在这个工业被年轻男人所统治

。局部地说，这是一个人才流通的问题；有那么多的年轻的傻瓜想要进入

游戏行业，他们想要的酬劳是如此之低以至于游戏工业的老人们都让位给

了年轻的脸孔。这个工业有二十年的历史，而它的雇员的平均工作经验不

到五年。

     采用这种廉价的劳动力我们很容易看出来后果。不仅仅是整体文化

的薄弱。这么多的年轻人来了又去，很少有机会去建立一个整体的价值观

。没有一个冷静的，有经验的人在适当的时候说：“我们不能那么做。”这

让这个工业缺少道德上的约束。

     与之形成对照的是出版行业。出版行业的工作人员数年，数十年地

在这个行业工作；有些出版公司已经有一百年以上的历史。很多都在纽约

城，它们彼此熟悉。丑闻会很快地通过公司之间的联系传播，流氓和盗贼

于是被拒之门外。当然也不缺乏竞争；这些人在每时每刻都在竞争。但是

他们带着道德和礼仪进行竞争------这是游戏工业所缺少的。谈到好莱坞

，出版业有着它自己的选择，但是在工业价值观这方面，游戏工业应该好好地向出版业学习。
  
      游戏工业现在碰到了这样的问题：它被分成了两部分，出版商和开发者。出版商们想要快速地赚钱，他们有着自己的文化。年轻的人们冲进工作室，带着冲动进行开发。工作室的速度会让传统观点大吃一惊。我放弃了追踪这样的工作室的痕迹，它们的寿命普遍太短暂了。

     游戏工业现在是一个充满了年轻男人的工业。对于年轻男人来说，这很不错。但是如果工业决定成长和扩张，它需要更为广泛的人才群体。

           atian.dpnet.com.cn------welcome!