好游戏不一定要好玩(√）
一个垃圾游戏再好玩也没救（？）
游戏必须要能够触动，不能触动你的就是垃圾游戏（？？？）
什么毛病，单纯的好玩就不能触动人了吗？
扭曲论坛 发表于 2021-4-8 12:46
也没说是双人成行制作者说的啊……
啊啊我眼残otz
本帖最后由 Hidewhite 于 2021-4-8 13:42 编辑
你坛终于认识到王者荣耀是款多么伟大的游戏了吗？国民性的好玩游戏啊，发十个年度最佳不为过吧？
人民群众喜欢的好玩，不喜欢的算老几去
马猴肥宅 发表于 2021-4-8 12:09
但是双人成行抛开好玩就一无是处了啊，剧情一塌糊涂美术也一般般……
---------
兄啊，这游戏美术够屌也够多了，可以称得上是奢侈。光是二重身+时间操控那关的美术单独拎出来已经非常惊世骇俗了，这还只是一关。
这算啥，人气起来了就开始有拱火乐子人了吗
—— 来自 HUAWEI CDY-AN90, Android 10上的 S1Next-鹅版 v2.4.4
Vladimeow 发表于 2021-4-8 13:50
兄啊，这游戏美术够屌也够多了，可以称得上是奢侈。光是二重身+时间操控那关的美术单独拎出来已经 ...
是我当时阅读理解错误之后一时上头，想想这美术还是挺好的，只是我不太喜欢otz当时上头就以个人喜好去评判了，是我不好otz
本帖最后由 hshiki 于 2021-4-8 14:46 编辑
什么算好玩？只有轻松愉悦才算好玩吗？
有质感的交互算不算好玩？有挫败感的挑战算不算好玩？良好的体验算不算好玩？十三机兵我都觉得是好玩的游戏
换成阅读，好书是否一定是好看的书？那怎么才算好看呢？同样是一本信息密度高的书，有人看得累觉得不好看，有人被内容吸引，看得再累也有愉悦感
我认为摘取一个主观概念搞对立的行为是不可取的
过渡的表达欲导致的魔怔人。
本帖最后由 4790d 于 2021-4-8 14:56 编辑
我来总结一下
糖豆人，肤浅的电子游戏
高尔夫2，yyds
—— 来自 HUAWEI NOH-AN00, Android 10上的 S1Next-鹅版 v2.4.4
说这话的时候确定不是磕嗨了？！
我认为好玩就是能最终让玩家得到满足
听着像机核硬塞狗屁私货
但要是真的话，以后见到他就说“你的游戏挺好玩”
谷歌了半天没找到原文...
zakufa782 发表于 2021-4-8 15:49
谷歌了半天没找到原文...
同，就着机核给的几个英文关键词找了半天没找到
本帖最后由 Stellar_Frost 于 2021-4-8 16:32 编辑
那期节目，作为一个质量效应三部曲脑残粉，我想说的是2代图岑卡一点都不后期...套路倒确实是那个套路，但是整个ME系列都充斥着这种场景，这也是它神的地方之一
游戏玩的是体验，单项分值加权不能真正反映“体验”。因为有人注重交互性带来的剧情沉浸体验，有人注重拿手里好玩，评价标准不同，需求不同鸡同鸭讲的汴京有啥意思？
对我来说吧，好玩不重要，重要的是别让我产生傻批游戏不好玩这种负面情感。同理游戏是不是真的高智商烧脑不重要，重要的是能不能让我舒爽的刷刷刷的同时产生我在动脑子的错觉
本帖最后由 johnwick 于 2021-4-8 16:24 编辑
https://www.indiegraze.com/2017/07/19/interview-disco-elysium-team/
What we’re really trying to get to is a community of video game designers who view their work as carrying responsibilities beyond those of a toymaker. In video game culture, we have this destructive adoration of fun which rules as an idolatrous tyrant over all other considerations. You can uncover downright scary fundamentalist rage online if you have the gall to challenge this tenet.
For me, the fact that we call these creations “video games” is essentially an etymological curiosity. They have long since stopped being games.
This is a controversial enough statement that it should probably be supported by additional statements such as: shit video games can also be fun, but that doesn’t make them good. Good video games can be not fun, and that doesn’t make them bad. Fun is an aspect among many, and it’s harmful to elevate it above others. A thing doesn’t have to be fun to keep you engaged either – it has to be engaging. We should be wreaking havoc on internet forums demanding for games to be engaging!
Oh, but I digress. We’re trying to reach out to developers who take responsibility for their creations, who see their work as more than bleak entertainment. Creating games is an opportunity to challenge, to enrich, to stir emotions. And the hope is, if you get these people – these designers, companies and authors – together, you can start doing something. That’s how you get a voice, say something and have people hear you, get out of the video game ghetto and impact humanity and culture at large.
小泉花陽 发表于 2021-4-8 12:53
一切需要重复作业的刷子游戏都挺符合个人对好玩的烂游戏的定义的，像MH、命运、全境这些，就是拿来放空脑子 ...
命运没玩过，全境一般般，但是MH不同怪物的招式设计和不同武器提供的截然不同的解法都能提供给人耳目一新的震撼
这里的好玩果然是fun
DE: What we're really trying to get to is a community of video game designers who view their work as carrying responsibilities beyond those of a toymaker. In video game culture, we have this destructive adoration of fun which rules as an idolatrous tyrant over all other considerations. You can uncover downright scary fundamentalist rage online if you have the gall to challenge this tenet
For me, the fact that we call these creations "video games" is essentially an etymological curiosity. They have long since stopped being games.
This is a controversial enough statement that it should probably be supported by additional statements such as: shit video games can also be fun, but that doesn't make them good. Good video games can be not fun, and that doesn't make them bad. Fun is an aspect among many, and it's harmful to elevate it above others. A thing doesn't have to be fun to keep you engaged either - it has to be engaging. We should be wreaking havoc on internet forums demanding for games to be engaging!
Oh, but I digress. We're trying to reach out to developers who take responsibility for their creations, who see their work as more than bleak entertainment. Creating games is an opportunity to challenge, to enrich to stir emotions. And the hope is, if you get these people - these designers, companies and authors together, you can start doing something. That's how you get a voice, say something and have people hear you, get out of the video game ghetto and impact humanity and culture at large.
And you know what? If to add what the community has taught us or what relationships we have made, then we have really been thinking about localization and porting. It is not just an industry thing to consider in need to reach wider, no, a lot of it is your fans and supporters asking for it. Linux lovers is a whole universe and man they are loud spoken! These kids literally say: "Look, I do not live with my mum, I work and will throw money at you if you fill our wishes. And there is detective story lovers who want to read in their own language and they have voiced their needs to us and we really want to answer to that by delivering to those who asked.
这是原文，机核没有添油加醋，包括那句video game ghetto，就是这么说的......
本帖最后由 sughiy 于 2021-4-8 16:36 编辑
这应该是电子游戏的事而不是游戏。游戏本身是围绕玩产生的，电子游戏则是一个媒介，随着技术的发展，它更多的向交互艺术的方向发展。展现了有别于电影的表达方式，从这个角度去讨论，那么好玩自然禁锢住了更多的表达。但你想的话也可以把它们看作完全不同的东西。人就是喜欢定义来定义去，总会有人喜欢或不喜欢，但喜欢的人少是个事儿么？不免给热一种找认同的感觉。
johnwick 发表于 2021-4-8 02:16
https://www.indiegraze.com/2017/07/19/interview-disco-elysium-team/
看这原文是有点魔怔了
920619lqy 发表于 2021-4-8 16:33
看这原文是有点魔怔了
这制作人本来就是个文人
johnwick 发表于 2021-4-8 16:16
https://www.indiegraze.com/2017/07/19/interview-disco-elysium-team/
toymaker 这发言感觉基本上就是怼任豚的
极乐迪斯科游戏性没问题啊 他这发言就是魔怔了吧
Geminize 发表于 2021-4-8 12:40
乔尔夫2，把剧情当彻底不存在，单纯当动作解谜游戏射击游戏玩，还真挺好玩的
...
土楼2在原文里对应的应该是好游戏不好玩 个人意见
本帖最后由 竜破斬 于 2021-4-8 17:03 编辑
虽然我觉得以目前游戏所指代的东西的多样性，有人并不以传统的好玩为目标做游戏也再正常不过，甚至值得鼓励。但是这个人和Blow的观点让我觉得游戏在他们眼里主要是一种传道和自我表达的工具，至于大多数一般消费者在游戏里寻求的娱乐属性在他们眼里不仅不值一提，甚至在他们眼里对游戏这媒介的进一步发展是有害的。然而游戏今天能够有这么大的市场，很多偏门、非传统的游戏都能找到一些受众，我觉得很大程度上得归功于这几十年来为了给大众提供游戏这种新形式的娱乐不断努力的传统娱乐型游戏公司。或多或少受益于娱乐型游戏创造的市场的表达型创作者如今掉过头来对游戏的娱乐性口诛笔伐，作为没有很大表达欲望的一个普通娱乐游戏玩家我着实不太能赞同。
游戏的fun和规则本身带来的乐趣还是有区别。游戏的核心是规则，在规则上对抗合作叙事推演……最后形成整体的体验，放弃规则就不是游戏了。DVD时代还有一堆可以遥控器选结局的电影呢，选择播哪个结局和游戏的有规则限定的选择枝就是有区别。
要说追求fun妨碍创作，电影也是这样。观众和创作者希望有fun有严肃，投资人觉得还是fun来钱，当然最终还是能形成一定的平衡。就算写本书也得看出版商乐意印几本做多少宣发呢，除非就自己闷头写着玩。能做个稍微严肃点的游戏不扑街，卖得还不错，说明这条路还能走，别人卷别人的你走你的呗。
本帖最后由 zakufa782 于 2021-4-8 17:18 编辑
把全文看完了，这采访是17年极乐迪斯科都还没发售的时候做的，之后花了很多时间介绍游戏的机制，也就是在说游戏要怎么玩（怎样做游戏会好玩）。最前面有一段提到对话作为一种机制几乎是被信奉玩法至上的游戏设计者抛弃了，对话只需要作为陪衬物就够了。这导致对话玩法多年以来都没有进步过，就好比假如fps游戏机制还停留在德军总部3D的水平，所以他们才要去钻研和拓展对话机制，于是就有了极乐迪斯科里的思维内阁。全篇看下来的意思应该是说极乐迪斯科从玩法到内容都有意和当时的主流游戏界（以及各种设计观念）背道而驰，responsibility大于fun也像是说不必向单一的游戏标准妥协。
游戏和能互动的软件间有什么区别
—— 来自 OPPO PCLM10, Android 10上的 S1Next-鹅版 v1.3.3.2-play