游戏设计快乐之道
Theory of Fun for Game Design
Raph Koster · 初版 2004 年
15人推荐
19位读者提及
21次提及
为什么值得读
- 指出大脑的乐趣源于对事物的掌握与学习
- 通俗易懂地解答游戏本质功用与体验价值
- 设计理念可直接迁移并启发优秀UX设计
本书探讨了：什么是乐趣；为什么有些游戏趣味盎然，有些却索然无味；不同的人如何对不同类型的乐趣做出反应；是什么决定了一款游戏是否好玩；游戏如何融入更广泛的人类文化；游戏能否成为艺术；游戏创作者应当承担何种程度的社会责任；游戏可以如何发展。不过其核心在于：为什么游戏至关重要。
Hacker News 上怎么说
正在加载完整评论……
……教授真正的音乐技能（不像《Guitar Hero》那种 :o）。在开发过程中，教学法和游戏机制确实产生了冲突，我们做了大量的用户测试来寻找平衡。Raph Koster 的《Theory of Fun for Game Design》帮了大忙，Daniel Cook 的讲座和文章也很有价值。这游戏挺难的，尤其是对没有音乐背景的人来说，但即便如此我们的用户参与度依然很高。排在排行榜前列的玩家……
…teaching real musical skill (in contrast to say Guitar Hero :o). The pedagogy and game mechanics did clash into each other during development, we did a lot of user testing to find a balance. Raph Koster's Theory of Fun for Game Design was invaluable, as were lectures and posts by Daniel Cook. It's a hard game, especially for people with no musical background, but nonetheless we had strong engagement. Players who topped the leaderboard…
……可以在任何讨论中拿来当论据。我不太赞同这篇文章那种自视甚高的调调，觉得做游戏本身就是件高尚的事、理应拿到补贴。不过我很喜欢 Koster，《Theory of Fun for Game Design》正是让我对游戏开发真正产生兴趣的书。
…usable as argument in any discussion. I don't subscribe to the self-entitled tone of the article that making games in itself is something virtuous and should be basically subsidized. I love Koster though, Theory of Fun for Game Design is what made me really interested in game development.
Raph Koster 写了本好书叫《A Theory of Fun for Game Design》，我觉得作为通俗易懂的入门书，它把这个问题讲得挺到位的。如果非要浓缩成一点的话，我最大的收获就是：你的大脑会在掌握某种东西（打败某个……
Raph Koster has a good book, "A Theory of Fun for Game Design", which I think does a pretty good job as an easy read intro to the problem. My main takeaway from it, if I had to boil it down to one point, is your brain finds fun in mastering something (beating a…
倒也不用咬文嚼字，但要回答那个孩子的问题“游戏有什么用？”，Raph Koster 的《A Theory of Fun for Game Design》正是为了解答这个问题而写的。归根结底，他的核心论点是：游戏是为了教给我们东西而创造的，它们可以用来娱乐，而且能让我们获得绘画……所无法带来的体验。
Not to be too literal, but to answer the kid's question, "What are games good for?" Raph Koster's A Theory of Fun for Game Design sets out to answer just this. Essentially his argument boils down to that games are made to teach us things, that they can be used for amusement, and that they allow us to have experiences that paintings,…
……——Brenda Laurel 的《Computers as Theater》——Kim Goodwin 的《Designing for the Digital Age: How to Create Human-Centered Products and Services》——Bill Moggridge 的《Designing Interactions》加分推荐：——Raph Koster 的《A Theory of Fun for Game Design》（虽然针对的是电子游戏设计，但很多经验都能用到优秀 UX 上）至于 UI 设计，我还极力推荐 Jacques Bertin 的《Semiology of Graphics: Diagrams, Networks, Maps》，以及……
…— Brenda Laurel, Computers as Theater — Kim Goodwin, Designing for the Digital Age: How to Create Human-Centered Products and Servicesa — Bill Moggridge, Designing Interactions Bonus: — Raph Koster, A Theory of Fun for Game Design (meant for video game design, but has a lot of lessons that can be applied to good UX) For UI design, I'd also heavily recommend "Semiology of Graphics: Diagrams, Networks, Maps" by Jacques Bertin, and…
我挺喜欢 Raph Koster 的《Theory of Fun for Game Design》。对于我们常说的产品或设计决策，它有很多极佳的洞见，读起来像本哲学书，而且你学到的东西也能用到日常生活中。
I quite enjoyed "Theory of Fun for Game Design" by Raph Koster. It has many great insights about what we'd call product or design decisions, but it feels like a philosophy book, and you'll also learn stuff that applies to daily life.