By Rct Studio
(The content of this article is provided by the public account "rct studio", please obtain your consent to reprint.) ）
The development of video games
It's a never-ending battle!
The history of video games for mankind is colorful. From the first video game in history: the cathode ray tube entertainment device, to the first video game to come out of the laboratory: Cosmic War! To the world's first commercial coin-operated electronic game console: "Computer Space", to the pioneers who created various myths and classic games: "Space Invaders", "Pac-Man", "Donkey Kong", "Super Mario", "Zelda Legend", etc., and now more and more console games and mobile games, the transformation and innovation of generations of games have brought players more different new game experiences.
If we think about it further, we begin to ask: What is the essence behind the innovation of the game?
In his book The Art of Game Design, Jesse Schell writes that game mechanics are the true core of a game, the interactions and connections left behind after all aesthetic representations, technical implementations, and story settings have been stripped away. If the game mechanics are to unlock the code hidden behind the innovation, then by understanding the game mechanics more deeply, we may be able to unlock this code.
And thinking about this concept, we want to try to understand it from a completely new perspective.
The stars in the history of human video games, in addition to leaving players with countless admiration and touching, have also become the underlying elements of the next generation of new games. In The Nature of Technology, Brian Arthur mentions that the technology must be somehow derived from a new combination of previously existing technologies. The technological forms of the past have become an integral part of the original technology of the present, and the cutting-edge technology of the present has become a possible component of the construction of newer technologies.
In turn, some of these technologies will continue to become possible building blocks for new technologies that have not yet been realized. Slowly, the initially simple technology developed more and more technical forms, and the very complex technology often used very simple technology as its component. The collection of all technologies has grown from scratch, from simple to complex.
The technical body is self-created, producing new technologies from itself. Alternatively, we can use a word coined by Humberto Mathulana and Francisco Varela, self-generated, to describe this self-generated system. That is, technology is self-created (Greek for "self-creating") or "self-bringing-forth"). Self-creation seems a little abstract, more like some kind of systematic philosophical theory; but in fact, it tells us more.
First, it tells us that every new technology comes from what is already there. Thus each technology stands on top of a pyramid that was built by other technologies on top of earlier technologies, a continuous process that can be traced back to the earliest human-captured phenomena.
At the same time, it tells us that all future new technologies will come from existing technologies (perhaps in a non-obvious way), because they are all elements that make up the new elements of the future that will eventually make future new technologies possible.
It also tells us that history is important: if technology appears in different sequences by chance, the technology built on top of those technologies will also be different. Technology is a product of history.
So we think that the development of game mechanics also follows this path: the mechanics in new games are born out of the constant combination of mechanics in old games, and those great game classics have never stopped fighting and are still constantly helping game innovation.
And what exactly is the game mechanics we are talking about above? What are the game mechanics? Is the game mechanics a way to play? What is the relationship between the game mechanics and the rules of the game? When we talk about the above concepts, we will find that these concepts only exist in the darkness of our subconscious, as if we feel something vaguely, but it is difficult to describe it clearly, so we try to explore the relationship between game rules, mechanics and gameplay from the essence of the game definition.
1. Start with Play Game
The so-called "playing games" is "voluntarily overcoming unnecessary obstacles". This is the best definition of "playing games" given by Schutz in Grasshoppers: Games, Life, and Utopia.
Bernard, Suits. The Grasshopper : Games, Life and Utopia. Broadview Press, 2014.
To break this sentence down: voluntary (game attitude) to overcome (game method) unnecessary (game rules) obstacles (overcoming obstacles linked together is the goal of the game), that is, the above four elements constitute the definition of playing the game.
Taking it a step further, how can we better understand this definition and the relationship between the four elements? First of all, let's look at the goal, what is the goal? For example, to participate in a running race, the participant's goal could be:
Win this game
The first to cross the finish line
In the above two goals, it seems to be the same, but in fact, the second goal is achieved in the most diverse way, the participant can start early, can go directly through the infield, can interfere with other competitors, and can even drive a sports car to participate in the race, so even if he completes his goal, that is, the first to cross the finish line, it is difficult for us to agree that he is participating in this game.
Relatively speaking, "winning" can only be described through the language of the game, so winning can be called the "game goal" in the game process.
So we can know that the second goal can be seen as the goal before a game takes place, also called the pre-game goal, which refers to the goal that can be achieved "before any game constituted or about to be constituted by such a goal" can be achieved. We can also understand it as a game goal that deviates from the game.
With a game goal, we need to have a game method to achieve that goal. Continuing with the example just given, we can see that crossing the infield, rushing, and interfering with other players can all be seen as a more "effective" way to achieve the goal, but it cannot be called a game method, or it is not a way to win a game.
We're focused on the ways in which the game is allowed to help you win. And this method, we call it the game method. That is, the game method is allowed to be used to achieve the goals of the previous game.
And what limits the methods we use, namely the rules in the game. The effect of a game rule is to prohibit certain methods that are effective before reaching the goal of the game. For example, in the previous example, running in a running race was effective, but it was forbidden. For example, in the game of rock scissors cloth, it is always slow out, which is very effective, but of course it is also forbidden. These rules, along with the clear pre-game goals, together build all the conditions that must be met to play the game, which we call construction rules.
We can find that construction rules always exclude the simplest, most effective, easy, and direct methods, and prefer complex and difficult methods.
Therefore, the construction rules limit the most efficient way to achieve the previous game goals, and encourage the use of "less efficient" methods to complete the game. That is to say, the game we play is carried out under constraints, and how to achieve our game goals under constraints is what players need to explore and game.
With the lowest, most basic construction rules, sometimes other rules are extended on top of these rules, such as rules with a punitive nature, such as three seconds of defense in a basketball court, and violating this rule will not make the game impossible, but will only bring punishment, so this rule is just an extension of the construction rules.
Finally, about the attitude of the game. This is actually a very difficult thing to imagine, the player voluntarily gives up the means to achieve the goal quickly, and voluntarily accepts some kind of restriction, choosing to participate in the game in an "inefficient" way. With such a game attitude, the whole game can be smoothly carried out.
The above four elements, interacting and complementing, together constitute the definition of "playing a game": voluntarily overcoming unnecessary obstacles.
2. Theoretical framework: game mechanics to gameplay
From the definition of the game, we can find that after having the game goal, the construction rules in the game build the logic of the entire game from the bottom, and different game rules will bring different constraints and penalties, thus deriving different game methods to achieve the game goal. In order to better balance the relationship between game goals, methods and rules, a systematic set of game mechanics is needed to adjust.
It is worth emphasizing here that the concepts of mechanisms and rules can easily be confused. In fact, the mechanism is more to play a secondary rule, complementary to the rules, so that the player has a better game experience in the game process. For example, the reward and punishment mechanism is a supplement to the rules of the game in this case to enhance the playability of the game.
In addition, the rules are public and consistent to all players, while the game mechanics are not necessarily public and are allowed to be hidden. For example, when the player is at a disadvantage during the game, the game may automatically reduce the difficulty of the game to improve the player's sense of participation, which reflects the coordination and balance of the mechanism in the process, and more importantly, can enhance the player's sense of experience.
In the end, the player interacts with the game and produces a gameplay.
How to understand the above content?
First, let's understand the word "mechanic" from a perspective outside the game.
The term "mechanism" originated in Greek and originally referred to the construction and working principle of the machine. This definition of mechanisms can be interpreted in two ways: one is what parts the machine is made up of and why it is made up of those parts (existence); the other is how the machine works and why it works this way (coordination).
Extending the original meaning of mechanism to different fields produces different mechanisms. If extended to the biological sphere, biological mechanisms arise; by extension to the social sphere, social mechanisms arise. Extending to the field of games, game mechanics are produced. Therefore, to understand the concept of mechanism, the most important thing is to grasp 2 points:
First, the existence of various parts of things is the premise of the existence of mechanisms, because things have the existence of various parts, and there is a problem of how to coordinate the relationship between various parts
Second, coordinating the relationship between various parts must be a specific way of operation
Therefore, the mechanism is to link the various parts of things in a certain way of operation, so that they work in coordination. Because of this, in a game, the game mechanics must not be an invisible concept of internal logic that is divorced from the goals, methods, and rules of the game, but a balanced system based on the content that exists.
Of course, the relationship between the three has also been discussed by scholars, for example, in the paper Describing computer-augmented games in terms of interaction, Lundgren and Björk argue that game mechanics are merely a term, specifically to describe the rules applied in the player's interaction with the game, that is, there is no difference between rules and mechanisms in nature.
But in our research framework and system, such a view is clearly unacceptable. We believe that the game mechanics are the product of the coordination of the relationship between the three, relying on the interaction of the three. As Richard Rouse mentions in 21st Century Game Design, the game mechanics describe what players can do in the game world and how they can help players improve their experience in the game, which is a manifestation of coordination and balance.
From imgur.com, by admiralpotato
3. Glorious Revolution of Game Mechanics
Of course, we understand that game mechanics can play a role in coordinating and balancing, improving the player's gaming experience, but a more accurate description is needed to be able to express it accurately.
In his paper Defining Game Mechanics, Miguel Sicart defined game mechanics as a method invoked by a player to help them interact with the game. The best way to understand game mechanics as methods is to formalize them into verbs, such as climbing, riding (horse), stabbing, jumping, shooting (arrows), grabbing, running, and so on. All of these verbs are methods that players can use in the game world, actions that can be taken to achieve goals under the constraints of rules.
However, the game mechanism is not only a method, but also a game behavior, mode, skill, state, etc., which is the product of all explicit and implicit systems in the process of achieving the game goal, and the coordination of game goals, methods and rules is also affected by the role of these three.
3.1 Generalization and classification of game mechanics
Through the combing of the concept of game mechanics and the analysis and understanding of multiple games, we have sorted out and refined the game mechanics, and listed these core game mechanics in a categorical manner:
1. Time setting mechanism
Time mechanism: day, night, hour, minute, second
2. Confrontation & Mission Mechanism
Confrontation mechanics: Round, Half Round, Instant, Time Limited
Matching mechanics: Real people (battle, team), robots (teammates, opponents)
Mission mechanics: Conditions (trigger, complete), objectives (run, collect, kill, dialogue... ）
3. Scene & Resource Mechanism
Resource mechanism: production rate, consumption rate, regional limit
Scene mechanics: maps, levels, nesting mechanisms, coordinate locations
Spatial mechanism: open, closed
4. Character & Object Mechanism
Action mechanics: standing, sitting, squatting, walking, running, jumping, flying, swimming...
Behavior mechanics: Shoot, Snatch, Slash, Drive, Operate, Switch, 、...
Role Mechanism:
Survival: Health, Stamina
Attack: Base, Critical Strike, Penetration (Ignore), Armor Breaking (Reduced), Attack Speed
Defense: Base, Armor, Resistance, Parry (Damage-Free), Block (Damage Reduction)
Agility: Movement speed, dodge
Genres: Physics, Magic, Elements (Ice, Fire, Wind, Thunder, Water, Earth, Light and Dark), Others (Shooting, Shooting)...
Status: Normal, Condition (Trigger, Terminate), Change (Gain, Weaken)
Skill Mechanics: Cycle (Forward, Forward, Back Shake, Cooldown), Interrupt (Forceable, Non-Forceable)
Combo Mechanics: Type Combinations, Skill Combinations, State Combinations, Effects (Buffs, Weakens)
Item Mechanics: Equipment (Numerical Effects, Limitations), Items (Cost, Duration, Numerical Effects)
Growth Mechanism:
Experience (Character, Equipment)
Levels (Characters, Equipment, Items)
Crafting (equipment, items), conditions (equipment, items, resources, probabilities), results
Forge (equipment, items), conditions (equipment, items, resources, probabilities), results
Additional attributes (equipment, items), conditions (equipment, items, resources, probabilities), results
5. Communication & Social Mechanisms
Social mechanisms: chat, dating, marriage, mentoring...
Faction mechanics: teams, guilds, gangs, classes, countries, races...
6. Numerical & Balancing Mechanism
Numerical mechanism: fixed value, percentage
Random mechanism: rule-based, probability-based
Competitive mechanics: Combat strength, winning rate, dan position:
Reward and punishment mechanism: reward (condition, result), punishment (death, failure)
Economic mechanism: trading system (tokens, real money)
Balancing mechanism
In the process of summarizing the above game mechanisms, we certainly know the difficulty and significance of each game mechanism born in each era, and we only extract these mechanisms from the lower logic, and finally present the hardships of the birth process in the text, but we deeply understand the great significance behind each mechanism.
By combing through the above game mechanics, we can know that a game is composed of a variety of game mechanics, and it is the variety of game mechanisms that allow players to have more different game experiences and produce different ways to play. Although a game is made up of different mechanics, there will be a core mechanism called the core mechanism.
Miguel Sicart believes that from a system perspective, the core mechanism is defined as a game mechanism for mainly reaching the end of the game. For example, in a first-person shooter game, shooting is the behavior of the game that mainly reaches the end of the game, so shooting is the core mechanism of this type of game. Games like SimCity don't have such an end state, but players need to focus on the desired state, such as keeping the city budget in a good state. These games have a specific set of game mechanics that target these states, so the core mechanics can be talked about even in the absence of a final state determined by the system. In games like SimCity, the core mechanics are those that focus on reaching equilibrium.
3.2 Specific explanations of gameplay
3.2.1 Game Classification and Game Elements
As discussed earlier, gameplay is the product of the player's interaction with the game under a specific game mechanic. The type of game we usually talk about is not gameplay, and most of the game types are named after the conventional game theme elements in order to unify the context during the player's communication process. For example, what we call action games mainly refers to games that have added action theme elements; music games mainly refer to games that have added music theme elements, and so on.
Of course, we will also say turn-based games, semi-turn-based games, etc., and such a name is based on the core mechanics of the game. As we've blurred these concepts, the naming of game categories has also begun to blur, but it comes down to not understanding the relationships between them enough, which is what we're trying to address in this article.
Just here we introduced the concept of game theme elements, which are actually derived from game elements. What are the game elements? Game elements refer to the basic elements that can interact with the player in some way within the game world, while theme elements refer to elements that have strong directivity. For example, if music is the main interactive element of the player's gameplay, then music is the thematic element of the game; the same is true for action.
Further, we can know that what we call an action element is a definition that does not have any color and function orientation, and the action mechanism is based on the action element to add specific coordination and balance of the game objectives, methods and rules. That is to say, certain game elements can be converted into game mechanics, as long as we give the element a certain specific function, so that it can interact and coordinate with the game goals, methods and rules. For example, if a game's equipment is a game element, but the game developer can give that element a specific function to balance the goals, methods, and rules of the entire game, then that element becomes the item mechanic we described above, resulting in gameplay during interaction with the player.
In addition, it is worth mentioning that the "game mechanism theoretical framework" we have built is not to forcibly change people's names or expressions of different types of games, but to recognize the game type, game mechanics, game play, and theme elements in a more reasonable way, so as to combine or create new content, and bring the source and driving force of innovation for the game itself from the underlying logic of the game.
Therefore, we have compiled a list of current game classifications and specific masterpieces, and used it as a "game mechanism theoretical framework" to compare and analyze the object, so as to come up with a more rigorous and theoretical structure of the description. At the same time, on this basis, the relationship between "game mechanics", "gameplay" and "theme elements" is explained, as well as the reasons for the current way people define and describe game types.
3.2.2 Game theme elements, gameplay and game mechanics
Based on the game type, we use the "Game Mechanics Theory Framework" to split and list the mechanics, gameplay and elements of different types of games, and present them in a tabular manner.
In the table below, we can see that while there are many game types, some are even only one or two word different. But in fact, the game mechanics and gameplay behind them are the same, and their differences are often in different game theme elements. Unlike game mechanics and gameplay, there are very, very many themed elements, and in this table we have given only a few examples to distinguish them.
By analyzing the characteristics of different types of existing games, we can split the corresponding core mechanics and the corresponding core gameplay. Strictly speaking, the description of an existing game type is distinguished based on the thematic elements emphasized in the game. Therefore, it is often the case that the general description of the game type is often confused with the game mechanics and gameplay. For example, some descriptions argue that a "sandbox game" is a gameplay, which is actually a misdefining.
In the above game mechanism theory framework, the game mechanism of "sandbox game" is "confrontation mechanism + space mechanism + scene mechanism + character mechanism", "real-time" is often expressed in the "confrontation mechanism" of this type of game, and at the same time, it is often "open" in the "space mechanism", and in the "scene mechanism", "maps and levels are nested with each other", on this basis, with the "role mechanism". If on this basis, plus RPG or action game mechanics, you can show the elements of related games, such as "action mechanism", "item mechanism", "combination mechanism", etc., then such a "sandbox game", through the superposition of game mechanics, becomes a "role-playing sandbox game" or "action role-playing sandbox game".
Therefore, based on this set of game mechanics theoretical framework, we can think that not only the number of core mechanisms is limited, but also the number of core gameplay is also limited.
According to the analysis results in the table, the core gameplay of the game has the following types: role playing, action execution, skill use, item use, strategy combination, resource collection, free exploration, task completion, displacement, matching, and confrontation.
At a macroscopic point of view, there can be a lot of "elements" in the game, and the content it describes will be more extensive: any object that we intuitively feel, logically analyze and reason can be the element of the object under discussion. For example, what we now call "first-person shooter", the core mechanism is "scene mechanism + team mechanism + item mechanism + action mechanism + behavior mechanism + confrontation mechanism + matching mechanism", the core gameplay is "confrontation", and the theme elements are "first person" and "shooting".
However, in order to make this theoretical framework more specific, as mentioned above, the "elements" we are discussing refer more to "thematic elements". This "theme element" in the game can affect the "gameplay" while participating in the combination of "game mechanics" and "gameplay" in an independent form.
For example, for "shooting", it is both a kind of "behavior mechanism" and can represent a "theme element", if you add "character mechanism" and "skill mechanism" to it, then based on the "behavior mechanism" of "shooting", the game has a "role playing" and "confrontation" gameplay with "shooting" as the "theme element". For example, games such as "Overwatch" and "Valorant" add the gameplay of "role playing" and "action execution" to the "confrontation" gameplay; if the "matching mechanism" is removed, it is a single-player game, such as "Call of Duty"; the "confrontation" with the "matching mechanism" is a network shooter, such as "CS:GO" and so on... Therefore, innovating any new game mechanic will bring players a completely new gaming experience, and the combination of different game mechanics will lead to completely different games, resulting in different gameplay.
3.3 Revolution and innovation of game mechanics
3.3.1 The feasible path of innovation: converting elements into mechanisms
Within the current theoretical framework of game mechanics, we have distilled a series of game mechanics that can no longer be abstracted, as well as the corresponding gameplay. We also explain why the description of the game genre is mostly from the perspective of the element, and why this element refers to the "theme element".
For example, what everyone calls "action games" is a game characterized by highlighting movement. The "action" here literally means the performance characteristics of action, but implies the "action mechanism" and the corresponding "action execution" gameplay. That is to say, when everyone says the same game element, there is no unified understanding behind it: what exactly does this element represent? Therefore, this kind of problem is called "context problem", and the solution is the "game mechanism theory framework" that we propose, to constrain and summarize a limited number of mechanisms and gameplay that have a decisive impact on the game experience.
In the above elaboration, we mentioned that a game element can be converted into a game mechanic, as long as we give the element a certain specific function that allows it to interact and coordinate with the game goals, methods, and rules. That is, whether it is an element related to the theme of the game or other element used to assist or provide "serendipity", as long as it can coordinate the goals, rules, and methods of achieving specific goals in a certain game, then this element can become a game mechanic.
In addition, such elements will also allow players to achieve the set goals of the game with higher interaction frequency and deeper interactive content under the limited rules of the entire game experience.
For example, equipment in a game is a game element. Game developers can give the rig specific features that balance the goals, methods, and rules of the game as a whole, and it becomes the "item mechanic" we described above, resulting in gameplay during interaction with the player.
At the same time, the plot of the game is also a game element. At present, everyone is supported by a combination of characters, tasks and other mechanisms, so strictly speaking, the story experience under the existing technical support cannot be called a mechanism. However, if the plot itself is to coordinate the player to achieve the game goal in various ways under the rules, that is, this game goal is highly related to the story experience, and even through the player's own creation of the plot, then the "plot element" can become the "plot mechanism".
So, what kind of game elements have the potential to become game mechanics?
This question is raised because we think about the elements of the game, we can know that there are many game elements in a game, but not all the game elements can be used as game mechanics in the form of empowerment. From the above examples, we can find that the elements that can become game mechanics need to be the main interactive objects of the game mechanism coordination process in addition to meeting the possibilities of technical implementation. By empowering the element, it can satisfy the role of coordinating the game goals, rules and methods, and the element becomes a mechanism.
In addition, the angle of the mechanical cutting of the element is also very critical. For example, in the example we gave above, a certain degree of empowerment of the equipment in the game can make it become an item mechanism, and the empowerment angle here is based on the attributes of the equipment, and the objectives, rules and methods of the game can be adjusted by increasing or decreasing the attributes of the equipment, thus affecting the player's game experience. This is a very accurate and perfect angle of entry.
In the absence of an obvious breakthrough in the current game mechanics, the idea of elemental mechanics provides us with a new way to innovate, perhaps we can choose a core game element and choose the right entry angle, thus giving birth to a new game mechanic.
3.3.2 Will the NPC-enabled personality give birth to the next game mechanic?
As we discussed above, choosing a suitable and precise entry point to empower elements can give birth to unexpected game mechanics. In traditional games with NPC elements, the interaction between players and NPCs is mainly dialogue clicks and function selection, while the role of NPCs in the game is mainly to assist players and advance the game plot.
Furthermore, games with "confrontation mechanism" as the core will add NPCs to cooperate with players' confrontations, and games with plot, narrative, and emotion as the main elements will put NPCs in the focus. Whether it is to assist the "mission mechanism" so that the player can feel the advancement of the plot elements, or to promote the development of the "character mechanism" to make the player emotionally connected to the characters in the game, NPCs play a pivotal role.
These NPCs all have scripted stories or written into the game in different narrative ways, but they don't become a game mechanic. Due to the limitations of current technology, NPCs are unable to coordinate the achievement of core objectives with a high degree of freedom like other mechanisms. So what's the right angle to empower that NPC element? If we imagine each NPC as an independent individual, then they must all have independent thoughts and personalities. What happens if we empower NPCs with personality elements?
In other words, if we can achieve free interaction between people with different personalities and backgrounds as in a certain scene in the real world, and advance the plot and generate emotional connections according to the player's personal wishes, then the "personality element" behind the NPC can become a game mechanism. Under limited rules, "character elements" can coordinate the player's freedom to achieve game goals through interaction with NPCs. In this way, this game mechanic can be called a "character mechanic".
We understand that some of today's games have added personality elements to NPCs, which may affect the player's achievement of goals to a certain extent, but it does not constitute a coordination of game goals, methods and rules, so it is not separated from the most basic game mechanics. So empowering npCs with personality elements that can influence the goals, rules, and methods of the entire game is an innovation in the game mechanics from the bottom.
Empowering NPC personality elements, NPCs may attack players because the player says some unhappy words, or are threatened by players to help players, such empowerment methods will affect the goals, rules and methods of the game, so that the freedom and sense of experience of the entire game will be improved. At the same time, such a "character mechanism" will also directly lead to a new core gameplay, which we may currently call "narrative play".
The implementation of such a mechanism will be a long process, or it must not be an easy process to implement. Because in addition to giving each NPC a new sense of life, so that they can make independent decisions under their respective personalities, it is also necessary to balance the other mechanisms in the game, so that the interaction of the game's goals, methods and rules is more perfect, thereby breaking the player's expectations and improving the entire game experience.
In such a long-term game process, perhaps a more innovative mechanism will be born, breaking our understanding of the boundaries of the game again and again, and such a future we believe must exist.
3.3.3 Combinatorial possibilities brought about by new game mechanics
Just as technological breakthroughs can bring structural innovation opportunities to the entire industry, innovations in game mechanics can bring new gameplay and experiences to games. In addition to the new gameplay and new experiences brought about by the innovation of individual game mechanics themselves, we also emphasized in the above discussion that the mechanics of modern video games are constantly being combined in various ways, and in the process of giving birth to the fusion of forms and corresponding gameplay and elements.
According to the principle of permutation and combination, if you combine a new game mechanic and an existing mechanic in an unordered manner, you choose a combination of X mechanics from 23 mechanics. Where 23 represents the above 22 existing mechanisms plus 1 new mechanism, X represents the number of mechanisms to be combined. At the same time, the corresponding 11 core gameplay will also become 12 core gameplay. As a result, the number of core gameplay combinations will change from 12 types of gameplay to choose Y to combine, and Y also represents the number of games to be combined.
For example, if the role-playing adventure game represented by the "scene + character + action + skill + item + growth + task + confrontation" mechanism is used as a combination object and the "personality mechanism" is added, then the corresponding "role play, action execution, skill use, item use, task completion" gameplay combination will also introduce a new gameplay of "narrative play".
Specifically, based on the different personalities of NPCs, in "narrative play", players do not necessarily need to mechanically experience and feel the game content through "mission execution", and can freely interact with dialogue and action, so as to understand the story and characters more immersively and deeply. Even different personality-driven NPCs will have different preferences for equipment and items: when the player takes a "legendary" equipment, the NPC will feel that the player is an idol and mentor, will follow the player, and then help recruit people to form the player's team; but when the player does something disrespectful to the NPC, the NPC will leave the team or even lead the rebellion...
In the above example, the "narrative play" gameplay brought about by such a "character mechanism" can even coordinate and cooperate with other gameplay to provide players with a very rich and interesting new game experience. Of course, an important feature of the mechanism innovation is that the new game mechanics can be combined with other well-known gameplay in addition to the gameplay with RPG elements.
For example, combining the "narrative play" gameplay with elements such as cultivation and love can amplify the immersive emotional interaction of a real person; combining the "narrative play" gameplay with cards, replacement and other elements can achieve the description in "Game King", and present the corresponding roles, skills and scenes represented by the cards in a more vivid way, bringing players a new game experience...
In fact, there are so many, very many possibilities for innovative combinations like this one, which cannot be described all at once in this article. The structural innovation opportunities brought by new technologies require many developers and players who love games to explore and discover together.
Write at the end
In fact, at this point, by establishing a framework for understanding the game mechanics, we may have solved the initial doubts about game innovation: the underlying game mechanics left by the ancient game pioneers have brought players new and different gameplay methods through recombination again and again in subsequent games, further bringing a different game experience.
Of course, this is not the end of game innovation, human beings will not be satisfied with the existing game mechanics, we will break through the shackles of existing game mechanics, look for more game elements that can be mechanized, and bring players a newer game experience. And this breakthrough again and again, like a battle that will not stop, we will continue to move forward with the great game pioneers, to the end of the human imagination.
It must be admitted that in trying to build this "game mechanics theoretical framework", we have encountered many difficulties, not only from the definition of a specific concept, but also from the different understandings and cognitions of the same concept. In analytic philosophy, this is called the "contextual problem." Wittgenstein believed that a word or description only makes sense if it is placed in a particular context. If you leave a specific context, its meaning is difficult to understand.
Therefore, when we analyze and construct, we are also trying to divide the use scenarios and description objects of different concepts. Nevertheless, it is inevitable that there will be some ambiguity; at the same time, for the game mechanics and gameplay we have summarized, we also believe that there is still room for optimization, and we hope that everyone can be more tolerant and give valuable advice.
From a completeness perspective, we should use this theoretical framework to provide an illustrative analysis of past and present games, but given the length and reader's reading experience, we plan to elaborate and discuss them in the next article.
The human imagination is constantly subverting the future of video games, and it's like a battle that never stops, and our research won't end.
References & Materials
Schell J. The Art of Game Design: A book of lenses[M]. CRC press, 2008. Arthur W B. The nature of technology: What it is and how it evolves[M]. Simon and Schuster, 2009.
Lundgren S, Bjork S. Game mechanics: Describing computer-augmented games in terms of interaction[C]//Proceedings of TIDSE. 2003, 3.
Bateman C, Boon R. 21st Century Game Design. Hingham, Massachusetts: Charles River Media[J]. 2006.
Sicart M. Defining game mechanics[J]. Game Studies, 2008, 8(2): n.
https://imgur.com/gallery/DAA1N
https://www.gameres.com/846979.html