有兴趣的可以看看:D

http://www.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?t=293417
Zileas' List of Game Design Anti-Patterns
by Zileas


I've been asked a few times, "Why don't you do stuff like Rupture (from DOTA Bloodseeker) in LoL?"

I usually respond -- Rupture contains several basic design 'anti-patterns'. I thought I'd post for the benefit of those who are interested what strong anti-patterns I am aware of.

So... Here are a few that come to mind.... Note that you can find an example of each of these somewhere in our game at some intensity level. Sometimes this is just bad design. Sometimes this is because we got something else in exchange. Design is an optimization -- but these anti-patterns are of negative design value, so you should only do them if you get something good in return.

Power Without Gameplay
This is when we give a big benefit in a way that players don't find satisfying or don't notice. The classic example of this is team benefit Auras. In general, other players don't value the aura you give them very much, and you don't value it much either. But mechanically, it is very strong. Suppose we gave a +15 damage aura... Really powerful, not that appreciated. On the other hand, if you cast the aura and gave them flaming weapons, which on next hit burst for 100 damage, and we could do it once every 20 seconds, you'd get about the same power, and people would value the effect more. The problem with using this anti-pattern is that you tend to have to 'over-buff' the mechanic and create a game balance problem before people appreciate it. As a result, we tend to keep Auras weak, and/or avoid them altogether, and/or pair them on an active/passive where the active is very strong and satisfying, so that the passive is more strategic around character choice.

Burden of Knowledge
This is a VERY common pattern amongst hardcore novice game designers. This pattern is when you do a complex mechanic that creates gameplay -- IF the victim understands what is going on. Rupture is a great example -- with Rupture in DOTA, you receive a DOT that triggers if you, the victim, choose to move. However, you have no way of knowing this is happening unless someone tells you or unless you read up on it online... So the initial response is extreme frustration. We believe that giving the victim counter gameplay is VERY fun -- but that we should not place a 'burden of knowledge' on them figuring out what that gameplay might be. That's why we like Dark Binding and Black Shield (both of which have bait and/or 'dodge' counter gameplay that is VERY obvious), but not Rupture, which is not obvious.

In a sense, ALL abilities have some burden of knowledge, but some have _a lot more_ -- the ones that force the opponent to know about a specific interaction to 'enjoy' the gameplay have it worst.

Unclear Optimization
This is a more subtle one. when players KNOW they've used a spell optimally, they feel really good. An example is disintegrate on Annie. When you kill a target and get the mana back, you know that you used it optimally, and this makes the game more fun. On the other hand, some mechanics are so convoluted, or have so many contrary effects, that it is not possible to 'off the cuff' analyze if you played optimally, so you tend not to be satisfied. A good example of this is Proudmoore's ult in DOTA where he drops a ship. The ship hits the target a bit in the future, dealing a bunch of damage and some stun to enemies. Allies on the other hand get damage resistance and bonus move speed, but damage mitigated comes up later. Very complicated! And almost impossible to know if you have used it optimally -- do you really want your squishies getting into the AOE? Maybe! Maybe not... It's really hard to know that you've used this skill optimally and feel that you made a 'clutch' play, because it's so hard to tell, and there are so many considerations you have to make. On the other hand, with Ashe's skill shot, if you hit the guy who was weak and running, you know you did it right... You also know you did it right if you slowed their entire team... Ditto on Ezreal's skill shot.

Use Pattern Mis-matches Surrounding Gameplay
I won't go into too much detail on this, but the simple example is giving a melee DPS ability to a ranged DPS character -- the use pattern on that is to force move to melee, then use. This does not feel good, and should be avoided. I'm sure you are all thinking -- but WoW mages are ranged, and they have all these melee abilities! Well... Frost Nova is an escape, and the various AEs are fit around a _comprehensive_ different mage playstyle that no longer is truly 'ranged' and is mechanically supported across the board by Blizzard -- so the rules don't apply there ;p

Fun Fails to Exceed Anti-Fun
This is where the 'anti-fun' created on your opponents by your use of a mechanic is greater than your fun in using the mechanic. Dark Binding is VERY favorable on this measurement, because opponents get clutch dodges just like you get clutch hits. On the other hand, a strong mana burn is NOT desirable -- if you drain someone to 0 you feel kinda good, and they feel TERRIBLE -- so the anti-fun is exceeded by the fun. This is important because the goal of the game is for players to have fun, so designers should seek abilities that result in a net increase of fun in the game. Basic design theory, yes?

Conflicted Purpose
This one is not a super strong anti-pattern, but sometimes it's there. A good example of this would be a 500 damage nuke that slows enemy attack speed by 50% for 10 seconds (as opposed to say, 20%), on a 20 second cooldown. At 50%, this is a strong combat initiation disable... but at 500 damage it's a great finisher on someone who is running... but you also want to use it early to get the disable -- even though you won't have it avail by the end of combat usually to finish. This makes players queasy about using the ability much like in the optimization case, but it's a slightly different problem. If the ability exists for too many different purposes on an explicit basis, it becomes confusing. this is different from something like blink which can be used for many purposes, but has a clear basic purpose -- in that place, players tend to just feel creative instead.

Anti-Combo
This one is bad. This is essentially when one ability you have diminishes the effectiveness of another in a frustrating manner. Some examples:
- Giving a character a 'break-on-damage' CC with a DOT (yes, warlocks have this, but they tuned it to make it not anti-combo much at all)
- With Warriors in WoW -- they need to get rage by taking damage so that they can use abilities and gain threat -- but parry and dodge, which are key to staying alive, make them lose out on critical early fight rage. So, by gearing as a better tank, you become a worse tank in another dimension -- anti combo!
- With old warrior talent trees in WoW, revenge would give you a stun -- but stunned enemies cannot hit you and cause rage gain... So this talent actually reduced your tanking capability a lot in some sense! Anti-combo!

False Choice -- Deceptive Wrong Choice
This is when you present the player with one or more choices that appear to be valid, but one of the choices is just flat wrong. An example of this is an ability we had in early stages recently. It was a wall like Karthus' wall, but if you ran into it, it did damage to you, and then knocked you towards the caster. In almost every case, this is a false choice -- because you just shoudln't go there ever. If it was possible for the character to do a knockback to send you into the wall, it wouldn't be as bad. Anyhow, there's no reason to give players a choice that is just plain bad -- the Tomb of Horrors (original module) is defined by false choices -- like the room with three treasure chests, all of which have no treasure and lethal traps.

False Choice -- Ineffective Choice
Similar to above, except when you give what appears to be an interesting choice that is then completely unrewarding, or ineffective at the promised action. An older version of Swain's lazer bird had this failing... Because the slow was so large, you could never run away in time to de-leash and break the spell and reduce damage, and in cases you did, you'd just dodge 20% of the damage at a big cost of movement and DPS -- so running was just an ineffective choice.

Or We Could **** the Player!!1111oneoneone
This is where you straight up screw over the player, usually with dramatic flair, or maybe just try to make the player feel crappy in a way that isn't contributing to the fun of the game. These range in severity, but examples usually are spawned because the designer is a pretentious wanker who likes to show what a smart dude he is and how stupid the player is. I do not respect designers who engage in this pattern intentionally, and encourage any design lead out there to immediately fire any of your staff that does. I do understand that it can happen inadvertently. So, I love you WoW team despite the 'playing vs' experience of Rogue and Warlock, as you DO have the best classes of any MMO, and they look even better in Cataclysm.... But, on Bayonetta, what were you guys on Team Little Angels thinking? I know you guys likely do not care about my opinion, but really, did you think the stone award was a good idea?

Very Severe: The original tomb of horrors D&D module is the worst in existence. Good examples are the orb of annihilation that doesnt look like one and instakills you and all your gear if you touch it, and the three treasure chests where each has no loot and deadly traps and no clues that this is the case.

Severe: There's a popular wc3 map in China where you enter a bonus round, and have a 2% chance of just straight up dying rather than getting cool loot.

Situationally Moderate:Horrify + fear kiting from a competent warlock who outgears you in WoW. Guess what? You die before getting to react.

Mild: Stone award in Bayonetta. So... you barely get through the level for the first time, then get laughed at by the game with a lame statue of the comic relief character, and a mocking laugh. Please -- maybe a bronze award and a 500 pt bonus might be more appropriate? The player might have worked VERY hard to get through the level, espec on normal and higher difficulties. Maybe I'm unable to understand because I'm a Gaijin.

Non-Reliability
Skills are tools. Players count on them to do a job. When a skill is highly unreliable, we have to overpower it to make it 'satisfying enough'. Let me give you an example: Let's say Kayle's targeted invulnerability ult had a 95% chance of working, and a 5% chance of doing nothing when cast. We'd have to make it a LOT stronger to make it 'good enough' because you could not rely upon it... and it would be a lot less fun. Random abilities have this problem on reliability -- they tend to be a lot less satisfying, so you have to overpower them a lot more. Small amounts of randomness can add excitement and drama, but it has a lot of downsides. There are other examples of non-reliability, but randomness is the most obvious one. Abilities that require peculiar situations to do their jobs tend to run into the same problems, such as Tryndamere's shout that only slows when targets are facing away from him.


我已经问了几次，“你为什么不喜欢的东西在大声笑破裂（从DOTA的嗜血者）？”

我通常回答 - 破裂包含几个基本设计的反模式'。我想我员额利于那些有兴趣的是谁强反模式我是知道的。

所以...这里有一些我想到....请注意，你可以找到一些地方在我们的强度级别比赛了其中每一个例子。有时候，这仅仅是糟糕的设计。有时候，这是因为我们有以换取别的东西。设计是一种优化 - 但这些反模式是设计值负，所以你只能做他们应该得到的东西，如果你很好的回报。

如果没有游戏性的权力
这是当我们给一大好处的方式，球员没有找到满意或不另行通知。这个典型的例子是团队利益光环。在一般情况下，其他球员不珍惜你给他们的光环非常多，你不珍惜它，所以尽管。但机械，这是非常强烈。假设我们做了15伤害光环...真正强大的，而不是赞赏。另一方面，如果你施放的灵气，给他们燃烧武器，为100点的伤害下一个爆击，而我们可以做一次，每20秒钟，你会得到大约相同的权力，和人民将价值的影响更多。与使用这种反模式的问题是，你会不得不结束了，迷'的技工，并创建一个游戏的平衡问题在人们欣赏。因此，我们倾向于保持光环弱，和/或完全避免，和/或对他们在主动/被动那里的运动是很强大的和令人满意的，从而使被动的是更多的在字符首选战略。

知识负担
这是一个很受铁杆新手游戏设计师共同的模式。这种模式是当你做一个复杂的机械，创造游戏 - 如果受害人明白是怎么回事。破裂是一个很好的例子 - 在DOTA的破裂，您将收到一个DOT触发如果你是受害者，选择移动。但是，你没有办法知道这种情况正在发生，除非有人告诉你，或者除非你读它的在线注册...因此，最初的反应是极端的无奈。我们认为，给予受害人计数器是非常有趣的游戏 - 但是，我们不应该在上面的知识负担，搞清楚什么是游戏的可能。这就是为什么我们喜欢黑暗的结合，黑盾（两者都饵和/或'道奇柜台游戏，这是非常明显），但不破裂，这不是明显。

在某种意义上说，一切知识的能力有一定的负担，但有些人_a很多more_ - 那些迫使对手知道一些具体的互动，以'享受'的游戏有最糟糕的。

不清楚优化
这是一个比较微妙的。当知道他们已经使用了法术最佳球员，他们感觉真的很好。一个例子是安妮解体。当你杀死一个目标，获得的法力回来，你知道你用它最佳，这使得游戏更加有趣。另一方面，一些力学是如此错综复杂，或有这么多的相反效果，这是不可能的'即兴'分析，如果你玩过最佳，所以你往往不能得到满足。这方面的一个很好的例子就是上将在DOTA的船在那里，他滴超低温保存。船命中目标，在未来的一位，造成了一些破坏和一堆敌人晕眩。另一方面盟军损伤阻抗和奖金获得移动速度，而且损害减轻上来以后。很复杂！而且几乎不可能知道你是否使用了它最佳的 - 你真的想让你squishies到AOE的故事吗？也许吧！也许不是...这真的很难知道你用这个技能优化，觉得你犯了一个'离合器发挥，因为它是如此很难说，有这么多的考虑，你必须做出。另一方面，与阿什的拍摄技巧，如果你打那个谁是软弱和运行，你知道你这样做，是正确的...你也知道你们这样做是正确的，如果你减缓了整个团队...同上年Ezreal的拍摄技巧。

使用模式不匹配周边游戏性
我不会去太多的细节上，但是这个简单的例子，是给近战DPS能力的一个远程DPS字符 - 该模式的使用是强制移动到混战中，然后使用。这并不是自我感觉良好，并应避免。我相信你们都思考 - 但魔兽法师是远程，他们有所有这些近战能力！嗯...冰霜新星是一种逃避，和各种不良事件是围绕一个_comprehensive_适合不同的法师playstyle不再是真正的'范围'，是机械地支持全线暴雪 - 这样的规则并不适用于那里; p

有趣未能超过反乐
这就是'反乐趣，在你的对手你创建一个机械的使用比你在使用机械的乐趣更大。黑暗的绑定是非常有利的这种测量，因为对手得到离合器闪，就像你离合器命中。另一方面，一个强大的法力燃烧是不可取的 - 如果你漏有人为0你感觉还挺好的，他们觉得可怕 - 那么反乐趣是由超过乐趣。这一点很重要，因为该游戏的目标是为玩家玩得开心，所以设计师应寻求能力，在游戏中的乐趣净增加所致。基本设计理论，是吗？

冲突的目的
这个人是不是超级强大的反模式，但有时它的存在。一个很好的例子是一个500点伤害核弹减慢50％，持续10秒（而不是说，20％）敌人的攻击速度在20秒的冷却时间。在50％，这是一个强有力的战斗开始禁用...但在500点伤害它的一个伟大的人谁是运行装订...但你也想用它早去禁用 - 即使你不会有它的战斗结束时，通常利用完成。这使得球员如何使用，就像在优化案件的能力，反胃，但它是一个稍微不同的问题。如果能力的基础上明确了太多不同目的而存在，它成为混乱。这是从像闪烁，可用于多种用途使用不同的东西，但有一个明确的基本目的 - 在那个地方，球员往往只是觉得创意来代替。

反组合
这一个是坏的。这实质上是当一个人的能力削弱了，你有一个令人沮丧的另一方式的有效性。一些例子：
- 给予一个点字符一个'突破上损害抄送（是的，术士有这个，但他们调整它，使之不防在所有组合多）
- 与魔兽勇士 - 他们需要得到受伤害，使他们能够使用威胁的能力和取得的愤怒 - 但是招架和闪避，其中的关键是活着，就使他们失去了关键的早期斗争的愤怒。因此，作为一个更好的坦克传动装置，你成为一个更坏坦克在另一个层面 - 抗组合！
- 以老战士在WoW天赋树，报复会给你一晕 - 但目瞪口呆的敌人打不到你的愤怒，导致收益...因此，这实际上减少了你的坦克天赋能力，从某种意义上说了很多！反组合！

错误的选择 - 欺骗性错误的选择
这是当你目前与一个或更多的选择，似乎是有效的，但选择之一就是完全错误的球员。这方面的一个例子是一种能力，我们最近在早期阶段。这是一个像Karthus'墙壁，但如果你把它跑，它没有损害你，然后敲你对施法者。几乎在每一种情况下，这是一个错误的选择 - 因为你只是shoudln't去那里永远。如果这是可能的字符做一个击退送你到墙上，也不会那么坏。总之，我们没有理由让玩家的选择，这只是普通的坏 - 喜欢有三个宝箱，所有这些都没有珍惜和致命的陷阱房 - 獠牙（原模块）是指以虚假的选择墓。

错误的选择 - 选择无效
类似于上面，除了你给什么似乎是一个有趣的选择，然后将其完全吃力不讨好，或承诺的行为无效。作者：Swain的拉泽旧版本有这种鸟不...由于慢了这么大，你永远无法逃避的时候去皮带，打破咒语，减少损失，并在情况下，你做，你只会减淡的运动和DPS大成本的20％的伤害 - 所以运行只是一个无效的选择。

或者我们可以****玩家！1111oneoneone
这是你在直线上升螺丝的球员，通常与戏剧性的天赋，或者只是试图让球员感到的方式，是不是促进了游戏的乐趣蹩脚。这些严重程度范围内，但通常产生的例子，因为设计师是一个自命不凡的wanker谁喜欢向人展示什么是聪明的家伙，他是多么愚蠢的球员。我不尊重设计师谁在故意搞这个模式，鼓励有任何设计的铅立即火贵工作人员是否有。我也知道它可能发生意外。所以，尽管我爱你'玩比的魔兽世界盗贼和术士经验的团队，你有任何网络游戏最好的班级，他们在大灾变中显得更好....但是，在Bayonetta，你到底想对小天使队球员？我知道你们可能不关心照顾我的意见，但说真的，你觉得在石奖是一个好主意？

非常严重：在恐怖的D＆D模块原墓是现有的最糟糕的。很好的例子是歼灭战圆球，doesn't一眼instakills像你和你的装备，如果你触摸它，和三个宝箱，其中每个没有掠夺和致命的陷阱，并没有任何线索，这是事实。

严重的：有一个在中国流行的魔兽地图，你进入一个加分，并有一个只有2％直接死亡，而不是越来越凉爽战利品的机会。

Situationally中度：惊吓+恐惧从主管谁outgears术士在哇，那你放风筝。你猜怎么着？你死之前得到反应。

轻度：石材Bayonetta奖。所以...你勉强获得通过首次的水平，那么获得了比赛的嘲笑与救济的漫画人物雕像跛脚，以及一个嘲讽的笑声。请 - 也许铜奖和一个500磅的奖金可能会更合适？玩家可能会很努力工作以获得通过的水平，对正常和较高的困难，易翔。也许我无法理解，因为我是Gaijin。

非可靠性
技能是工具。运动员指望他们做工作。当一个技能是非常不可靠的，我们要打败它使'满足足够的'。让我给你举个例子：假设Kayle的有针对性的刀枪不入的超低温保存有95％的工作机会，一个无所事事的5％的几率在施放时。我们不得不做了很多增强，使'足够好'，因为你不能依靠它...它会少了很多乐趣。随机有这个能力的可靠性问题 - 他们往往会少了很多满足，所以你必须打败他们更多。随机性可以添加少量的兴奋和戏剧，但它有很多缺点。有非可靠性其他例子，但随机性是最明显的例子。特殊情况的能力，需要做他们的工作往往会遇到同样的问题，如Tryndamere的留言，只有当目标是减缓背向他。

[ 本帖最后由 chovosky 于 2010-10-18 08:58 编辑 ]

翻译器去死…………

我刚开始看中文看不懂还以为是因为我不玩LOL