手机游戏设计哲学编辑本段回目录
作者：Keen and Graev
在我们投入制作代号为“The Project”的手机游戏之时，我才意识到我们很少谈及手机游戏设计哲学这方面的内容。就我个人来看，目前市场上让我欣赏的手机游戏并不多。我觉得多数手机游戏与Facebook平台的Flash游戏并无多大区别，甚至也很难去反驳App Store充斥大量垃圾游戏这个观点。
那么，优秀的手机游戏究竟是怎样炼成的，或者我们应如何制作一款适合在iPhone、Android或Windows Phone手机上玩的游戏？我认为首先要考虑的是“为何要针对特定移动设备设计游戏”这个问题。例如，我们要是在iPhone平台发布《Bad Company 2》，那就有点荒唐了，因为它会成为一个逊于PC/掌机版本的游戏。iPhone设备无助于提升《Bad Company 2》的游戏体验。
The Project(from keen and graev)
“The Project”是一款风格与《猴子岛》和《国王密使》相似的冒险游戏，玩家可以逐屏探索其中的世界，寻找道具、解开谜题，会见角色并与之对话，同时随着游戏进展经历更多故事。其游戏玩法有赖于触屏互动设置，在移动设备上的感觉和玩PC游戏一样自然。
满足了这一点后，出色的手机游戏还需要其他哪些元素？
容易上手。在手机上玩第一人称射击游戏意味着玩家需要完全的沉浸其中，而使用弹弓将小鸟射出，以及在30秒内闯过一关这些操作，只需玩家在课堂做笔记的间歇就能完成。我们这款游戏也同样如此，可以让玩家收放自如，按照自己所需的速度体验游戏中的故事。
如果要让玩家觉得游戏“物有所值”，那就要让他们获得一种与价格相当的游戏体验或趣味性。这里所言的并非游戏促使玩家孜孜不倦地获取高分，并以此攀向Game Center排行榜前列的特点，而是游戏让玩家收获的乐趣。再想想《猴子岛》，你还会再玩这款游戏吧？当然会。为什么？因为其中的对话选项至今仍未过时，还是很能逗乐玩家。这跟我们重温一部电影的道理相同。
最后，手机游戏开发者不得不注意的是触屏设置这个特点。不要因为游戏投放于触屏设备，而将所有游戏玩法局限于点触或者划动手指。Wii平台也曾遇到类似的问题。如果游戏玩法看起来有点勉强和不自然，那就说明设计有问题。
我们致力于开发一款搞笑，并且拥有开发续作潜力的游戏，并希望它能够让玩家爱不释手，频频重返游戏。
游戏邦注：原文发表于2011年9月1日，所述事件以当时为背景。（本文为游戏邦/gamerboom.com编译）
Our Mobile Game Philosophy
by Keen and Graev
It’s been a while since we’ve updated you guys on where we’re at with our game in development, codenamed “The Project”, and I realized we also haven’t spoken much at all about our mobile game philosophy. Personally, there are very few mobile games that I enjoy. I see most of them in the same vein as flash games on Facebook and you’d be hard pressed to make a case against the statement that the App stores are mostly full of garbage.
What makes a good mobile game, or specifically a game that you would play on your iPhone/Droid/Windows phone? I think the most important thing to consider is the ‘why’ question. Why is the game on the device and is it there for a purpose or does being on the mobile platform benefit the game design in any way? For example, releasing Bad Company 2 on the iPhone is ridiculous. It is inferior to the PC/Console versions. Nothing the iPhone does elevates Bad Company 2.
“The Project” is a classic adventure game like Monkey Island and King’s Quest. You discover the world as you explore screen to screen. You find items, solve puzzles, meet characters and have conversations, and experience the story you unfold as you progress. Gameplay is simple touch-interaction and in a sense feels more natural on a mobile device than it does on the PC.
What else makes a good mobile game? Read on.
Mobile games need to be easy to pick up and play. Playing a first person shooter on a phone means being totally engaged in the activity whereas shooting birds with a slingshot and beating a level in 30 seconds is something you can do between taking notes in class. Our game is going to be easy to set aside and pick up again because you’re experiencing a story we want to tell at a pace you decide.
For a game to feel ‘worth it’, players need to feel like the game never ends or the experience they had was engaging or interesting enough to justify the cost (which should be low, very low). This isn’t one of those never-ending move across the screen games to get a high score you’ll upload to Gamecenter. We’re shooting for an experience that the player finds funny and interesting. Again, think of Monkey Island. Can you replay it? Absolutely. Why? Conversation options never get old and you go back to be entertained. It’s the same reason we re-watch movies we’ve already seen.
Lastly, there’s a very nasty condition out there among mobile game developers that can’t seem to be shaken: Touch-tards. Just because you can touch the screen does not mean your entire game has to be about tap-tap-tapping or swiping. It’s the same thing that has plagued the Wii. If it doesn’t feel natural, you’re doing it wrong.
We’re shooting for humor, those “oh that’s cool” moments, and an introduction to a story that leads into a much deeper realm of lore full of potential for additional games to be made — and there will be sequels as we unfold the story of our characters and their world. We hope it sparks something in everyone who picks it up and plays to want to come back for the next chapter.（source:keenandgraev）
