Game Development Giant

Jester is always thinking about a problem when he is developing games these days.

This issue is very acute. In the future, this is an issue that both game enthusiasts, players, and game designers will be considering.

Of course, the more consideration is from the player side.

That is, do you play a game that you think is fun, or do you play a so-called 'very popular' game?

It seems that this question is somewhat contradictory. Could a 'very popular' game be a bad game? How could he be ‘hot’ if he wasn’t funny? Since there are so many players playing it, it means it is really fun.

This question actually involves the question of what is fun.

This is a very personal thing.

Everyone has a different definition of fun, just like everyone has a different definition of delicious - Europeans like to eat stinky cheese, but they may not like to eat stinky tofu, and the reverse is also true for domestic people. Similarly, people in China like to eat animal offal, but Europeans and Americans may find this very disgusting...

There are many such examples. In other words, when it comes to taste, people in every place are completely different, even specific to each person. For example, Xiao Ming likes to eat spicy food, while Xiao Wang hates to eat spicy food - they are also different. .

The evaluation of whether a game is fun or not is very similar to this "taste". Everyone's criteria for judging "taste" are also different.

This game suits your taste, you think this game is really fun, but this game is not to your taste, then you think this game is not fun? No game can suit everyone's taste. The gameplay of the "Hypermarathon" series dwarfs other games around the world, but there are also a lot of people who don't think this jumping-eating-mushroom game is any fun. of.

"Diablo 2" created a new gameplay for ARPG and set a model for the development of MMORPG. However, this swipe-and-swipe game method cannot be loved by everyone.

Then consider the "Fallout" series, even a masterpiece like "Fallout: New Vegas." There are also many people who disapprove of him.

Not to mention GTA5, a game that Jester himself didn’t really like at first.

Some people will not like these popular games, not to mention those games that are niche and have fewer gamers? But these games also have their supporters. Is it because they are not popular enough that they are not fun?

"Game Goals."

After thinking about it for a while, Jester added a remark to this question in his mind - because if there is no such remark, the proposition of a so-called fun game or a very popular game is A false proposition that has no value for discussion.

Especially for designers.

When designers design games, they naturally want to make the game fun. Whether it is fun or not is a personal experience. In the final analysis, it is still a psychological feeling. This can be analyzed and discussed using psychological concepts and methods. This is why excellent game designers They all share the same principles as masters in psychology.

Designers who don't know how to understand the players' minds have no chance of success.

Moreover, taking Mars Entertainment as an example, the prerequisite for being a designer is that you must be an avid game enthusiast. This is not a reference condition. But it is a necessary condition.

They will definitely use their own inner thoughts as a reference when designing the game, and sometimes these references can even play a decisive role.

After the target positioning of a game is determined, the game development is based on this positioning. For example, if I want to develop an ACT game, then I need to consider the preferences of ACT game fans, not RPG game fans. If I want to design an FPS game, what I need to consider is the preferences of FPS game enthusiasts. Instead of considering the preferences of A~VG game lovers.

This is analyzed from the perspective of designers designing games.

The gameplay must be prepared for the target group, but it cannot be made to make the players, that is, your target group, like your gameplay. There are too many uncertainties and too high risks in doing so. In short, the probability of failure is too high.

When thinking of this, Jester couldn't help but think of the game "Heroes of the Storm". This game is simply a collection of failed games. Analyzing why this game failed can make many designers design games. It saves a lot of detours, just like analyzing the improvements from the original version of "Diablo 3" to the expansion pack "Reaper of Souls" can help a game designer learn a lot.

However, the differences between the two games are huge.

"Diablo 3" is a game, no matter how poor the original version was. That's all compared to "Diablo 2". In essence, this game is not that bad. At least it is unparalleled in terms of one-game experience. But in fact, this game only makes fatal mistakes in two aspects. The first point of the mistakes is that I made a mistake on how to 'brush'. The ultimate reason for this mistake lies in the major mistakes in the design of the equipment.

The second point is that buying equipment is far less efficient than the auction house, which completely destroys the game experience. Players come to play games, not to play in the auction house - the equipment they have worked so hard to buy. , go to the auction, you can buy better for just a little money, so why should I continue to brush equipment?

What is the core gameplay of Diablo?

Isn't it just about brushing equipment?

But when the design team was designing the game, the core of the gameplay remained unchanged. That is to say, this is a 'brush' game. In the final analysis, the changes they made in ROS only did two things. The first thing was to change it. How to get players to farm? The second thing is to abolish the auction house.

The biggest difference between Diablo 2 and the original version of Diablo 3 is that Diablo 2 can make players feel strong by grinding equipment, and then pursue the strongest, while the original version of Diablo 3 cannot do this.

Therefore, in ROS, what they do is to re-allow players to become stronger by grinding, and then pursue becoming stronger.

but. This change is a bit overkill - because it makes players feel that they are too strong, so strong that they feel that it is a waste of time to continue grinding. This is why a group of locusts always come to grind at the beginning of the season. A week to a month later they recede like locusts. As for how to change it, it is very simple, that is to restore the rune language system of Diablo 2.

Although this is just a variant of equipment, it is really an extremely beautiful and attractive thing.

The current fast-food farming method is equivalent to KM in Diablo 2. It allows players to obtain work clothes. Then Rune Language is the kind of thing that can make players full of interest and make themselves stronger.

But unfortunately, Blizzard is unlikely to reinstall Runeword.

Although players all over the world don't understand why Rune Language is so perfect, so beautiful, and a system that players identify with so strongly, they will not adopt it - not only do they not adopt it, they can't design anything stronger than this at all. It's said to be something stronger than this, something that doesn't even compare. It's really intriguing. Is it so difficult to admit that you are not as good as your predecessors?

Doesn’t the transformation of ROS prove this? You are indeed far inferior to your predecessors.

Of course, by analyzing the improvement process of "Diablo 3", we can analyze the gains and losses of many design teams in the process of designing the game. It is really like a textbook classic change, and the design team of Diablo 3 is really outstanding. .

However, there is a key point here, that is, there is no difference in the essential gameplay between "Diablo 3" and "Diablo 2".

But the game "Heroes of the Storm" is completely different. The difference is that Jester has already thought about it before, that is, his target group is extremely inconsistent with the gameplay he designed - Diablo 3 does not have such concerns. Because what they are making is a DIABLOLIKE game, the player base is extremely clear.

And what about the game "Heroes of the Storm"?

What is his goal position? They are players of the tower pushing game. These players spent ten years completing the design and gameplay of this type of game. These gameplays were not completed by any game company or designer alone. Although he adopted many settings from WAR3, even though he had the personal sparks of wisdom of Ice Frog and many other designers.

But in the final analysis, this is a mature game system formed by the ideas of countless players.

The target of the game "Heroes of the Storm" is these players, who are already accustomed to this mature game system. However, even though the target group of "Heroes of the Storm" has been determined, it did not consider it at all during the game design. Consider what game modes these players prefer. Instead, they just scratched their heads and came up with something that they thought was very C0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000L in the hope that players would accept their set of things.

The results are self-explanatory.

Since you are dismissive of what players like, then players will also be dismissive of what you think.

But one thing needs to be noted here. This is not to say that the COOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL stuff that Blizzard came up with is not worth mentioning at all. It can only be said that this is a very good idea, but this idea appeared too late. In the player's game When a pattern has become established, it is really difficult to make big changes.

If this game had come out five years ago, or even three years ago.

The situation might not be so embarrassing.

So what is the most fundamental drawback of this game? That is, the design team forcibly believes that this is a game that can only be played by five people, and all their designs are designed around this idea, completely ignoring that although the game is played in a team of five people, Participation in the game is based on one player. This game infinitely weakens the role of the individual and infinitely enhances the role of the team.

If players who completely change this type of tower push game don't consider other things, will they be successful?

There is no doubt that this is a success, the game is fun to play the way the designers play it, and just look at the Heroes of the Storm games. It is very intense and very beautiful to watch when played by two excellent and unified teams. Yes, but the problem is that players don’t recognize this game mode.

Compared with this drawback, the so-called matching and disconnection and reconnection problems are simply nothing worth mentioning.

That's why Jester believes that this game is simply a collection of failed games, because from the beginning, the design team has been stubborn and has its own way, rather than listening to what they think the target group wants. What kind of game are they going to play, and is it the kind of game they want to play - especially after the BETA test, after getting so much dissatisfied feedback, they still have that disgusting face of 'thinking I'm right'.

This is simply a lesson that all design teams should take heed of.

How did the team deal with the negative reviews for Diablo 3? First of all, as the director of "Diablo 3", Blizzard's legendary Rob Pardo suddenly resigned. Later, as the main designer of "Diablo 3", Jaron Ge was transferred from the development team.

And what about Heroes of the Storm?

The bald guy is still the game director, still promoting his ideas at carnival press conferences, and still making some minor changes, rather than looking directly at the core problem of this game - or let it go In this game, a single player thinks he is great, or he completely abandons the single player and completely turns to the team.

The first is to completely deny their own design concept, which is of course impossible. The second makes the design team unwilling, because it means that they have made irreconcilable flaws in the design from the beginning, and they also Won't.

It is foreseeable that this game will not be reborn in the short term.

Because he simply does not have the courage to start over from scratch like the original Diablo 3 design team. To be honest, if this was Blizzard more than ten years ago, "Heroes of the Storm" would have been remade.

A game like this is enough to educate many, many designers not to make the same mistakes again, just like a textbook of mistakes.

But I have to repeat myself. "Heroes of the Storm" is just an outdated game, not an unplayable game. If you have a good team, this game will be played very orderly and very enjoyable. His mistake It's just that the target group and the gameplay don't overlap, it's not the game itself. (~^~)