交互游戏启示录
如果手机游戏的未来是媒体化，毫无疑问，现在大多数的手机游戏都不具备那种口口相传的流行要素。一直以来，我都认为游戏作为一种媒体，可以采用比以往多得多的手段，超越以往的媒体，如电影，漫画等等。而且，现在已有报道说游戏行业的总产值已经超过电影业了。但目前的手机游戏大多数都令人失望，更别说国内的手机游戏了。
当我看麦克尔杰克逊的MTV时，强烈的节奏轰击我的心灵，让我不由自主的跟着扭动身体，一幕幕震撼的画面告诉我，这就是最好的MTV。这是我在大学里面看他的MTV的感受，昨天又重看了一遍，我仔细想了想，迄今为止，我看过一些不错的MTV，比如那个韩国的KISS,光良的第一次，但比起杰克逊的MTV，虽然风格不同，但感觉上还是差一个档次。迄今为止还没有看到过更好的。杰克逊的MTV是画面和音乐结合的经典。说到这一点，有一些恐怖游戏可能做得不错，大多数游戏应该说都做的不怎么样。为什么？
当我在看<everybody hates chris>时，我就在想，一个每集不到30分钟的短篇，居然可以浓缩这么多生活的笑料。很少有游戏能让你笑个不停。很多电影能够左右我们的情绪，让我们时而欣慰的笑，时而伤感的哭。而极少的游戏能做到这一点。为什么？
游戏作为一种媒体，其特点在于丰富的交互性。交互意味着有些时候进程要根据用户的反馈决定。游戏设计不能控制用户的反馈，所以也不能控制某些进程。因为不能控制，所以，很多游戏设计师放弃了引领玩家。而且大多数人都觉得游戏的交互性是游戏的核心所在，其他方面不是那么重要。一个明显的例子是，有一些很有名气的游戏制作者认为游戏不需要情节，比如ID soft的卡马克。我认为丰富的交互性是针对core user的，而专门针对core user的要素是较难流行起来的。
很多人回忆过去，都会觉得童年的时光是最美好的，自由自在，无忧无虑。但是如果仔细想想，他们是否真的愿意回到童年的时光呢？其实，每个人童年的时候都希望自己快快长大，为什么？希望自己能够主宰更多。小孩子的我们什么都得听大人的，不像大人们想干什么就干什么，多自由！等到自己长大成人，却发现，虽然有了选择的自由，很多时候我们却感觉更不自由，我们开始怀恋童年的自由自在。
在我看来，这就是交互性的悖论。不错，游戏的交互性确实给了玩家一些自由，但是，事实上，玩家感受的东西反而减少了。为什么早期游戏的玩家以青少年居多？他们需要更多主宰自我的机会，而游戏提供了这个机会。而成年人老年人并不太需要游戏中的这种体现自我主宰的机会，所以他们更多的看电影，听音乐等等。为什么目前简单的休闲游戏开始流行？是因为这种简单的休闲游戏其实规则相对简单，对很多成年人来说，就像童年的时光，虽然是有限的选择，同样可以玩的快乐。
现在，任天堂已经开始走在吸引更多的用户群的路上，从其出品游戏也可以看出，他们在打动引领用户这一点上做的很成功，但是游戏本身很简单，并没有多少复杂的交互性。我希望能在未来的手机游戏上看到同样的事情发生。如果要做到这一点，游戏设计者应该向电影导演学习，学习那些表现手法。说真的，电影能表现那么宽泛的题材，游戏目前能够表现的题材还是少了很多。游戏在这个方面还有很多的学习成长空间。如果有一天能够处理好交互性和感染力之间的平衡，那才是一个真正的媒体诞生的时刻。
Revelation of interactive games
If the future of mobile games is media, there is no doubt that most mobile games do not have the popular elements of word of mouth. For a long time, I have always believed that games, as a kind of media, can adopt much more means than before, surpassing previous media, such as movies, comics, etc. Moreover, it has been reported that the total output value of the game industry has surpassed that of the film industry. But most of the current mobile games are disappointing, let alone the domestic mobile games.
When I watched Michael Jackson's MTV, the strong rhythm bombarded my heart, and I couldn't help wriggling with my body. The shocking pictures told me that this was the best MTV. This is my feeling of watching his MTV in University. I watched it again yesterday. I thought about it carefully. So far, I have seen some good MTV, such as the Korean kiss, the first time of Guangliang. However, compared with Jackson's MTV, although the style is different, it still feels that it is still inferior to Jackson's MTV. No better has been seen so far. Jackson's MTV is a classic combination of pictures and music. Speaking of this point, some horror games may do well, most games should be said to do not do well. Why?
When I was watching < everybody hats Chris >, I was thinking that a short story less than 30 minutes per episode could condense so many jokes about life. There are few games that make you laugh all the time. Many movies can control our mood, let us sometimes happy smile, sometimes sad cry. And very few games can do that. Why?
As a kind of media, game is characterized by rich interactivity. Interaction means that sometimes the process depends on user feedback. Game design can't control user feedback, so it can't control certain processes. Because they can't control it, many game designers give up leading players. And most people think that the interactivity of the game is the core of the game, other aspects are not so important. One obvious example is that there are some famous game makers who think that the game doesn't need a plot, such as ID soft's camark. I think that rich interactivity is for core users, and it is difficult for core user specific elements to become popular.
Many people look back on the past and feel that childhood is the best, free and carefree. But if you think about it, do they really want to go back to childhood? In fact, everyone hopes to grow up quickly in childhood. Why? I hope I can dominate more. Children's we have to listen to adults, unlike adults do what they want, more freedom! When we grow up, we find that although we have the freedom of choice, many times we feel less free. We begin to cherish the freedom of childhood.
In my opinion, this is the paradox of interactivity. Yes, the interactivity of the game does give players some freedom, but in fact, the players feel less. Why are the early game players dominated by teenagers? They need more opportunities to dominate themselves, and games provide that opportunity. Adults and the elderly don't need the opportunity of self-control in the game, so they watch more movies, listen to music and so on. Why do simple leisure games become popular? It is because the rules of this simple leisure game are relatively simple. For many adults, it is just like childhood. Although it is a limited choice, it can also play happily.
Now, Nintendo has begun to attract more users. From the games it produces, we can see that they are very successful in moving and leading users. However, the game itself is very simple, and there is not much complex interaction. I hope to see the same thing happen in future mobile games. If you want to do this, game designers should learn from the film director, learn the techniques of expression. To be honest, the film can show such a wide range of subjects, the game can show a lot less theme at present. There is still a lot of room for learning and growing in this area. If the balance between interactivity and appeal can be dealt with one day, it will be a real media birth time
