社交游戏社交玩法编辑本段回目录
游戏邦注：本文作者为Jonamerica，原文发布于2009年10月22日，文中叙述以当时为背景。
包含两人或两人以上的游戏均可称作社交游戏，因为游戏需要玩家之间进行互动。然而并非所有游戏都真正具有社交性（游戏邦注：是指基于团队的社交玩法，而非个人体验）。有人也许会认为，基于社交平台的游戏都嵌入社交玩法；然而这正是社交游戏的失败之处。
社交游戏的基本模式是自我传播。这一般通过两个途径实现。首先，创造奖励系统，奖励那些拥有更多游戏好友的玩家。其次，通知玩家社交圈玩家所取得的成就。
例如，很多Facebook游戏都涉及“小饰品”送出和接受内容。游戏目标是从尽可能多的好友那收集大量小饰品。玩家每给出或收到一个小饰品，游戏就将此消息公布于玩家消息墙上。这类游戏完美契合上述两大途径。为能够在游戏中胜出，玩家需有系列好友共同体验。玩家每次体验（给出或接受小饰品），都是告诉好友自己在玩小饰品交换游戏。
也许有人会认为这个游戏从理论上看是具有社交性的（游戏邦注：其包括玩家之间的互动）。若我们将游戏从社交平台移除，我们就好比置身街头的精神失常者，一边分发小册子一边大喊，“我刚送出一本小册子！”这毫无社交性可言，我认为这从本质上来看是反社交行为。
FarmVille from tomuse.com
即便是更具参与性的游戏都不是真正意义上的社交活动。就拿《FarmVille》来说，在这款基于Facebook平台的游戏中，玩家管理自己的虚拟农场。游戏基本目标是耕地，种植和收割庄稼，照顾农场动物。通过这样赚取游戏货币，以购买农场商品。
为了解锁新功能，玩家需添加邻居（游戏邦注：玩家好友圈用户）。游戏鼓励玩家向好友圈送出农场礼物，邀请他们参与体验活动。玩家成就将呈现在消息动态中告知其他玩家。
这款游戏在强化游戏社交性方面投入很多功夫。玩家能够参观邻居农场，提供帮助、留言。帮助邻居无非就是简单点击按钮。一旦点击成功，便完成帮助行为。但是玩家无需同其他玩家互动，甚至是会面，游戏核心机制就是玩家管理自己的农场，这是种个人工作任务。
《王牌间谍》是款基于社交网络Twitter的热门间谍游戏，游戏现已拓展至Facebook平台。作为间谍，玩家实力同其Twitter粉丝或Facebook好友及好友玩家数量直接相关。玩家同时还能够通过发表游戏微博或更新内容获得奖励。但游戏机制本身是完全基于个人的。
spymaster from heromachine.com
《王牌间谍》社区已在游戏之外建立社交元素。例如，若玩家同团队协作完成进攻，那么“消灭”其他玩家目标将会轻松实现。玩家出于此目的设立的团队称作“单元”。早在《王牌间谍》引入单元功能前，就已出现让玩家能够开展社交活动和加入单元的网站。
然而，就像社区渴望真实、共同玩法一样，《王牌间谍》缺乏该元素。游戏本身并不鼓励团队玩法。杀戮仍旧是项单独活动。虽然玩家通过团队能够更顺利实现杀戮，但游戏并不要求或鼓励其通过团队合作。只有完成最后袭击的玩家才是杀戮活动的功臣。玩家无法获知团队伙伴行动或其攻击对象。虽然《王牌间谍》已推出单元内聊天功能，但许多单元更倾向使用游戏外的既有交流工具。
社交玩法是很早创建的游戏法则，根植于各类游戏（游戏邦注：如角色扮演游戏、基于团队的第一人称射击游戏、新型社交多人掌机游戏，如《摇滚乐队》或家庭娱乐游戏）当中。
社交游戏开发商尚未创造鼓励或要求社交玩法的作品，这点颇令人沮丧。为何不让《FarmVille》好友在同片农场共同协作呢？这些改变会在各个游戏中创造真正的社交玩法元素。
投身社交平台的游戏开发商仍旧无法引入鼓励真正社交玩法（游戏邦注：这是个颇受欢迎、应该植入社交游戏的功能）的作品，这点十分令人沮丧。（本文为游戏邦/gamerboom.com编译）
The failure of social media games
Any game that involves two or more people could be called a social game, in that it requires players to interact with each other. However, not all games are truly social – having social, team-based game-play, rather than solitary, individual game-play. One would think that any game based on a social media platform would inherently have social game-play; yet this is precisely where social media games have failed.
The basic model of social media games has, at its core, the goal of self-propagation. This is usually accomplished in two specific ways. First, by creating an award system for having more members of a player’s social network playing the game. Second, by informing the player’s social network of what they are accomplishing in the game.
Most Facebook games, for example, involve the giving and receiving of “widgets.” The goal of the game is to collect as many different widgets as possible from as many friends as possible. Each time you give or receive a widget the game publishes this feat on the walls of the players involved. These types of games illustrate the two above points perfectly. In order to prevail at the game you must have a network of friends that play. Every time you play – give or receive widgets – you announce to your friends that you are playing the widget game.
One may argue that this theoretical game is social – it involves interactions between people. If we remove the game from the social media platform, however, we’re left with nothing more than a mass of lunatics standing on soapboxes handing out pamphlets while yelling, “I just handed you a pamphlet!” There is absolutely nothing social about this – I would say this is quintessential antisocial behavior.
Even the more involved games have failed to be truly social. Take for instance the game FarmVille. Based on the social media network Facebook, the game has users managing virtual farms. The basic object of the game is to plow, plant, and harvest crops and take care of farm animals. Doing so earns in-game money that can be used to buy farm items (including more seed for planting).
In order to unlock features you must add neighbors – people from your network who are also playing. You are encouraged to send farm gifts to your network as a way to invite people to play. Your accomplishments are also posted in your news feed for others to see.
The game goes a little bit further in its attempts to be social. You can visit your neighbor’s farms to help them and to leave messages. The act of helping a neighbor is as simple as clicking a button. Once clicked, you’ve helped. However, you never interact with, or even see, the other player, and the bulk of the game-play is the managing of your own farm – a very solitary task.
Spymaster is a popular spy game based on the social media network Twitter, and has expanded to Facebook. Your strength as a spy is directly related to the number of Twitter followers or Facebook friends you have (spies) and how many others in your networks are playing the game (spymasters). You’re also rewarded for sending tweets or status updates about your game activities. But the game-play itself is completely individual.
The Spymaster community has gone outside the game to establish social elements. For example, “killing” another player is more easily accomplished if you have a team with which to coordinate attacks. Players created teams, called “cells,” for this purpose. Sites where players could meet to be social and join cells were created long before Spymaster introduced any cell features into the game.
Yet, as much as the community desires true, communal game-play, Spymaster is devoid of just that. Nothing in the game itself encourages team-play. Killing is still a singular activity. While it is easier to accomplish a kill with a team, it isn’t required or even encouraged. Only the person who strikes the final blow gets credit for the kill. There is no bonus for working as a team or joining a cell. You can’t see what your teammates are doing or have done, or who they are attacking. And while Spymaster has recently released a built-in chat for cells, many cells prefer to use established communication resources outside the game.
Social play is a long established norm within gaming and is inherent in entire game genres like role playing games, team-based first person shooters, or the relatively new generation of social multiplayer console games like Rock Band or “family entertainment” games.
That social media game developers have not yet created a game that encourages or requires social play is truly disappointing. Why not allow friends to work together in FarmVille on a single farm? Or in Spymaster, allow team members to select a single target, attack in one strike, and share the credit and spoils of a kill? Either of these changes would create a true element of social game-play in their respective games.
It is disappointing that game developers working on social media platforms continue to fail to introduce games that encourage real social game-play – a feature that many would truly enjoy, and should be inherent in social media games.（Source：jonamerica）
