第一篇關(guān)于好的制作人和好的團(tuán)隊(duì)組合對產(chǎn)品的影響分析
這大概是行業(yè)相對真實(shí)的Q & A了:
Q:游戲行業(yè)的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)主要來自于哪里
A,產(chǎn)品判斷失誤和團(tuán)隊(duì)執(zhí)行力差(或內(nèi)耗),是做項(xiàng)目最基本的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)
Q:那成功的關(guān)鍵是什么
A:有一個(gè)好的產(chǎn)品制作人
我們以前聊的做開發(fā)的兩個(gè)優(yōu)先級(jí)
從我自己做事的角度,我覺得有兩個(gè)事情是有超級(jí)優(yōu)先級(jí)的:
A,第一個(gè)是,有一個(gè)結(jié)構(gòu)相對穩(wěn)定,且實(shí)戰(zhàn)經(jīng)驗(yàn)和能力不俗的團(tuán)隊(duì)基礎(chǔ)
B,第二個(gè)是,領(lǐng)頭的人決斷力優(yōu)先,團(tuán)隊(duì)在結(jié)構(gòu)上分得清楚決策權(quán)重,以領(lǐng)頭的人的市場和產(chǎn)品判斷力為做事前提
在做產(chǎn)品里:
A,臨時(shí)拼湊的團(tuán)隊(duì)出岔的概率100%,單輪換可行的團(tuán)隊(duì)都能把項(xiàng)目折騰死
B,決策權(quán)含糊和混亂的團(tuán)隊(duì),在產(chǎn)品方向上大部分都要互相反面制約,互相消耗,互相妥協(xié),最終產(chǎn)品可能有的市場嗅覺就會(huì)讓位于妥協(xié)后的經(jīng)驗(yàn)優(yōu)先的結(jié)果
這兩個(gè)都是創(chuàng)業(yè)做事最致命的死結(jié)
flappy-tutorial-loop(from gamasutra)
第二篇關(guān)于產(chǎn)品設(shè)計(jì)中的減法模型對突出產(chǎn)品價(jià)值性的影響分析
Ray Mazza(模擬人生游戲設(shè)計(jì)師)在談到他們的游戲制作時(shí),提到了一個(gè)很殘酷的減法模型:
大量的游戲原型和設(shè)計(jì)理念在制作進(jìn)程中,因?yàn)楦鞣N原因,不斷被優(yōu)化和拋棄
為了完成一款高標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的產(chǎn)品
End game is maybe 10% of what you imagined in the beginning. But it’s the best 10%
最終,只有一小部分想法會(huì)被保留下來,而保留下來的,都是讓游戲體驗(yàn)更具價(jià)值的精華
Ray Mazza: That’s a really good question. In the first scoping process, from all the designs that we had written and all the designs that we had planned to write, we probably cut 70% of that away.
And then we did another iteration later on, once we were in production and had a better understanding of our velocity, and probably cut another 50%. And then, closer to the end of the project, when some things weren’t going as planned or just not turning out to be fun, then it’s maybe another 5 to 10%.
So you end up cutting a lot. Part of that, though, is because our sights were too high, like they tend to be with a lot of projects. If we’d kept the original scope, we’d still be working on the
base game right now. One of the things I’ve learned becoming a seasoned designer is that you need to start simple. Otherwise you’re going to be wasting a lot of time upfront.
It’s good to do expansive brainstorms. But to then go and scope right from there down to the core and the most interesting ideas, rather than planning to do it all. Because you will inevitably add more as you go, anyway – some of the cuts later on are to make room for new features that suddenly make sense as the rest of your game falls into place.
So, four years, all the resources in the world. End game is maybe 10% of what you imagined in the beginning. But it’s the best 10%.
第三篇關(guān)于微型團(tuán)隊(duì)中的企業(yè)文化分析
我們是微型團(tuán)隊(duì),所以我自己的邏輯就無比簡單:
A,要求會(huì)比較嚴(yán)格:
-做事真誠
-做事自律
-有專業(yè)能力
-有職業(yè)精神
-三觀正常
B,舊能提供回報(bào):
-盡量不無效占用團(tuán)隊(duì)的非上班時(shí)間
-做好團(tuán)隊(duì)的投入評估,從薪酬和福利角度舊能匹配團(tuán)隊(duì)的當(dāng)前付出
-為團(tuán)隊(duì)成員的成長和進(jìn)化預(yù)留回報(bào)空間
-將團(tuán)隊(duì)投入和產(chǎn)品成果緊密捆綁
-把團(tuán)隊(duì)成員合伙人化,而不是工作螺絲釘
事實(shí)上,用一句話就可以形容了:
愿意為項(xiàng)目全力以赴的團(tuán)隊(duì)和成員,都值得我們營造好環(huán)境,竭盡所能去回報(bào)他的認(rèn)同和追隨
第四篇關(guān)于成熟市場對后來者以高品質(zhì)產(chǎn)品突圍的價(jià)值影響
仍然是King CEO Ricardo Zacconi,在King要進(jìn)軍Facebook平臺(tái)時(shí),那時(shí)候的領(lǐng)先者Zynga,Playdom(Disney),Playfish(EA),Wooga,6Waves已經(jīng)壟斷了用戶市場形成了優(yōu)勢碾壓的格局
所以,他們理所當(dāng)然被認(rèn)為是一個(gè)不可能還有機(jī)會(huì)空間的后來者
太遲了 It’s Late
但King仍然堅(jiān)持自己的判斷:
A,這是一個(gè)已經(jīng)養(yǎng)成的超級(jí)用戶市場,包括用戶基量,包括用戶付費(fèi)規(guī)模
B,他們只需要拿出一款超級(jí)優(yōu)質(zhì)產(chǎn)品就可以參與切割市場了
畢竟游戲業(yè)是靠產(chǎn)品驅(qū)動(dòng)的
用戶只會(huì)跟著產(chǎn)品跑
We were told, ‘Look, social games are gone. There is a winner and that’s it. Why are you starting in April of 2011? It’s late.’
We said, We don’t think it’s late,” said Zacconi. “Now we are actually proven right, because there is now a large user base which loves to play games which are easy to play.
然后King擊敗了Zynga,成為DAU和MAU遙遙領(lǐng)先的開發(fā)者
順便把優(yōu)勢移植到了移動(dòng)平臺(tái)
第五篇在二八法則盛行的市場下高品質(zhì)是 的出路
King CEO Riccardo Zacconi在他們剛剛進(jìn)軍Facebook(那時(shí)候還不能與Zynga抗衡)時(shí),提到兩個(gè)非常重要的產(chǎn)品概念:
A,產(chǎn)品質(zhì)量都需要花時(shí)間打磨,你很難靠堆人戰(zhàn)略來跳過打磨的進(jìn)程
10個(gè)人10個(gè)月開發(fā)周期,并不等同于100個(gè)人1個(gè)月的開發(fā)周期
堆量是加勞動(dòng)力可以實(shí)現(xiàn)的,但品質(zhì)是拼湊不出來的,品質(zhì)需要系統(tǒng)性的管控和打磨
B,游戲業(yè)是產(chǎn)品型行業(yè),市場走向由產(chǎn)品驅(qū)動(dòng),這個(gè)產(chǎn)品指的是超級(jí)產(chǎn)品
完全符合二八法則
B1,這個(gè)行業(yè)是由核心的開發(fā)和發(fā)行公司驅(qū)動(dòng)的,增量和存量跟大部分企業(yè)沒有明顯關(guān)系
B2,核心的開發(fā)和發(fā)行公司是由少量超級(jí)產(chǎn)品驅(qū)動(dòng)的,跟大部分炮灰型產(chǎn)品也沒有太明顯的關(guān)系
Two things. Quality takes time; you can’t just speed up the process by putting more people at it.
The second one is, it’s a hit-driven industry
所以我上次聊到的:要賭就賭大一些的
………………
去年給自己命題之后,Social的嵌合執(zhí)行邏輯整整困擾了一年半
中間查閱了無數(shù)資料,畫了無數(shù)原型圖,完全不知所措。
】其原因,大概是我自己覺得我做產(chǎn)品沒有太多的機(jī)會(huì),要賭就賭大一些的
…………………………
對我來說,其實(shí)我自己的產(chǎn)品機(jī)會(huì)是很有限的,所以我們的下一款產(chǎn)品Social Polis,我就會(huì)竭盡全力在Mass Market的框架下進(jìn)行產(chǎn)品體驗(yàn)的冒險(xiǎn)
……………………………………
最近一直重復(fù)在看Supercell和Machine Zone在F2P產(chǎn)品的設(shè)計(jì)上究竟是怎么用力的
在原先設(shè)定的四大方法論詞匯:Social-Emotion-Magic Moment-Gameplay
兩大最核心的致命屬性:
A,Mobile,懂怎么做游戲,但更要懂怎么去挖掘移動(dòng)端的特征性
B,Usability,易用性優(yōu)先,違背易用性規(guī)則的策略深度和學(xué)習(xí)曲線,都要在易用性基礎(chǔ)上重構(gòu),直到滿足易用性標(biāo)準(zhǔn)
所以,我們的詞匯又豐富了一個(gè):Mobile-Usability-Social-Emotion-Magic Moment-Gameplay
雖然Mobile我們以前也常聊,但沒有到方法論能指導(dǎo)的高度
既然我只有非常有限的產(chǎn)品機(jī)會(huì),那對于我來說,就會(huì)更大膽:
既然要賭產(chǎn)品,那就賭大一些,賭我們有機(jī)會(huì)進(jìn)入用戶產(chǎn)品體驗(yàn)的頭部位置
賭我們有能力讓Social來重新成就Gameplay
Hello,Social Polis
…………………
當(dāng)然在我給自己命題的選項(xiàng)里,Social Polis的Social設(shè)定還不是時(shí)間跨度最長的
最長的是:
陀思妥耶夫斯基在Crime and Punishment中通過索尼婭,在The brothers Karamazov中通過阿廖沙,試圖以眼淚來漱洗一切的罪惡
為了搞清楚這其中的教義邏輯
系統(tǒng)研究了當(dāng)時(shí)的俄羅斯歷史環(huán)境,文學(xué)環(huán)境,東正教環(huán)境,存在主義哲學(xué)流脈,同期俄語作家的思維傾向,所有這一些不過是為了解剖陀思妥耶夫斯基思考一個(gè)角色和不同角色生活博弈的方法論
這個(gè)前后跨度都十幾年了
…………………………………
折磨了我整整一年半,在嘗試了無數(shù)個(gè)行不通的死胡同之后,終于將我們Social Polis想要做的:將用戶多維度深度嵌入關(guān)系鏈網(wǎng)格中的Social呈現(xiàn)邏輯,搞清楚了
我們想做的仍然是這三塊:
A,漣漪效應(yīng)
B,蝴蝶效應(yīng)
C,跨人際維度的關(guān)聯(lián)效應(yīng)
意圖還是:
A,以Social來反向優(yōu)化Gameplay
B,以關(guān)系鏈的深度嵌套來驅(qū)動(dòng)用戶的體驗(yàn)行為
在糾結(jié)了無數(shù)個(gè)日夜之后,還是想明白了
#每個(gè)人都深陷在自己和別人經(jīng)營的局里#
…………………
這是我一年多來,最開心的事
第六篇開發(fā)者對自己的核心機(jī)制被市場借鑒的產(chǎn)業(yè)態(tài)度
前Popcap的產(chǎn)品創(chuàng)意靈魂Jason Kapalka在談到行業(yè)對經(jīng)典產(chǎn)品的借鑒和復(fù)制,那些產(chǎn)品的真正設(shè)計(jì)者是怎么想的時(shí)
以自己和Cliff Bleszinski(Gears of War開發(fā)者)為例:
他們并不煩惱產(chǎn)品機(jī)制被抄襲
他們郁悶的是,那些山寨的人,舍本逐末沒抄對,實(shí)質(zhì)性的價(jià)值不抄,抄了皮毛…
I was talking to Cliff Bleszinski, the Gears of War designer, and he was upset that people were stealing the roadie run mechanic from Gears of War, but not stealing the active reload mechanic, because he thought that was a really great thing that more people should steal. He wasn’t mad that they were taking any of his mechanics, he was just like, “Why didn’t you take this one? It was really good!”
We get the same thing too, occasionally, and it is simple things like that, If someone rips off Bejeweled, sometimes they’ll do dumb things — like they won’t get the gravity of the gems right, so when they fall down they either fall down really fast, or really slow.
It seems like a simple thing, but it could make a big difference, in terms of how the games feel. That’s one of those things where it’s like, “Dude, if you’re going to rip off the game, rip it off right. Get those things correct.”
第七篇失敗理論上是做產(chǎn)品不應(yīng)該考慮的選項(xiàng)之一
YC 新老板Sam Altman在斯坦福的創(chuàng)業(yè)演講(20節(jié)課,每節(jié)大概50分鐘):Failure still sucks,You should still try not to fail
失敗并不是很多人認(rèn)為的Failure is great,失敗本身就是一場災(zāi)難
失敗可能摧毀一切
對任何的項(xiàng)目參與者來說,失敗就是各種慘痛的無效損耗
甚至你認(rèn)為的所謂的失敗教訓(xùn),你都學(xué)不到,下次該掉坑里的同樣會(huì)掉坑里
基本上,有容忍失敗的退路,就很容易原諒自己的不全力以赴了
………………………………
順便分享一下他以前也談過一個(gè)很酷的判斷:
成功=理念 * 產(chǎn)品 * 執(zhí)行 * 運(yùn)氣
其中運(yùn)氣的區(qū)間在0-10000的任何一個(gè)隨機(jī)數(shù)
所以他認(rèn)為創(chuàng)業(yè)最好的理由就是:
The best reason is you can’t not do it
不然你是扛不住中間的各種不愉快的
第八篇老好人是團(tuán)隊(duì)管理的大忌
Tal Ben Shahar在哈佛大學(xué)做了24期長達(dá)20小時(shí)的領(lǐng)袖心理學(xué)演講
最后提了一個(gè)無比尖銳的問題:
Is it possible to lead without getting your hands dirty?
作為一個(gè)為企業(yè)承擔(dān)責(zé)任的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者,有可能當(dāng)一個(gè)純粹的老好人嗎
That it was not possible
That to be a leader requires getting our hands dirty
毫無疑問,你常常要去做一些對你來說無比艱難但為了能有更好的未來不得不面對的決定
…………………
如果你選擇無視問題,問題就會(huì)反過來挖個(gè)深坑把你吃掉
這是一個(gè)to live or not to live的問題
第九篇保障用心用力的一致性是做好產(chǎn)品的 關(guān)鍵
Instagram兩位合伙人Kevin Systrom 和Mike kriegre在斯坦福大學(xué)的分享話題之一:創(chuàng)業(yè)做事,產(chǎn)品只占50%,而圍繞為了產(chǎn)品能完成的其他配套元素是否做得好同樣能正面和負(fù)面影響企業(yè)的未來
這也是我自己這一年來一直在反思的問題:我以為我只要專注做好產(chǎn)品就夠了,其實(shí)這才是最大的天真
以前我更多考慮的是:我想做什么
但事實(shí)上這是遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)不夠的,商業(yè)環(huán)境更殘酷的是你如何保障我想做什么能夠?qū)崿F(xiàn),任何一個(gè)額外的因素都能夠瓦解掉我想做什么這個(gè)原始的邏輯
第十篇看不懂和看不上才是產(chǎn)品評估的常態(tài)
Lars Buttler的觀點(diǎn)代表了地球人最真實(shí)的看項(xiàng)目的態(tài)度和邏輯:
〈缺點(diǎn)和看問題,這個(gè)我會(huì),還很擅長,我能馬上給你羅列一二三四五六不重樣,要多犀利有多犀利
至于看機(jī)會(huì)和看潛力產(chǎn)品,這個(gè)…我不會(huì),誰知道下一個(gè)Supercell在哪里啊,囧
I didn’t say it’s particularly easy to invest in gaming. I think it’s actually very hard. I also think it’s virtually impossible to predict which company will create the next worldwide megahit. It’s much easier to predict what will fail. It’s much easier to see when a team doesn’t jell or when an idea’s not great. To predict where a new Supercell will come from is virtually impossible. It makes early stage investing in games very difficult.
投稿郵箱:chuanbeiol@163.com 詳情請?jiān)L問川北在線:http://dstuf.com/