智能手機遊戲和主機遊戲爲何能夠愉快共存

In 1925, John Logie Baird wanted toconvince the public that his latest invention would be a great rtunately, when he arrived at the London offices of the Daily Express, hissales pitch was quickly dismissed. “For God’s sake, go down to reception andget rid of a lunatic who’s down there,”a news editor reportedly told staff. “He says he’s got amachine for seeing by wireless.”

1925年，約翰•羅傑•貝爾德(JohnLogie Baird)想讓人們相信，他最新發明的東西將大獲成功。遺憾的是，當他跑去《每日快報》(Daily Express)倫敦辦公室推銷，卻很快就被打發了。“看在上帝的份上，去前臺把那個瘋子趕走，”據說一位新聞主編對他的手下們這樣說，“那個人說他有臺能通過無線電波看到畫面的機器。”

This illustrates our inability to predictthe appeal of a medium, and particularly the problem of making a judgmentwithout hands-on experience. “Seeing by wireless”sounds impossible —until someone shows you a television set.

這件事說明，我們無法預知傳播媒介的吸引力，尤其是我們總愛不經體驗就妄下判斷。“用無線電觀看畫面”聽上去不可思議——直到某個人讓你見識到電視機。

And that is why anyone surprised by thecontinued success of console games, with a revival of market share and analystsforecasting a “golden era” — long after smartphones were supposed to havestolen their business — should try playing a few. Appreciating the differencebetween the experiences makes it easier to see how they can happily co-exist.

人們很早就認爲智能手機會搶走主機遊戲的生意，而事實上，不僅主機遊戲的市場份額在復甦，分析師們還預言它將迎來一個“黃金時代”，那些驚訝於主機遊戲長盛不衰的人都應該試着玩一玩。認識到智能手機遊戲和主機遊戲給人以不同的體驗，就更容易明白二者爲何能夠愉快共存。

Of course, we should not underplay theexplosive rise of mobile gaming. A decade ago, playing a game on the go meantbuying a dedicated gadget such as the Nintendo DS or PlayStation Portable. Nowcommuters tap away on their phones at Candy Crush or Clash of Clans, whileanswering emails and checking the weather on the same device.

當然，我們不應忽視移動遊戲的迅猛崛起。10年前，想要邊走邊玩遊戲，就得買個像任天堂DS (Nintendo DS)或是索尼PSP (PlayStation Portable)那樣的專用設備。而現在，人們在上下班路上不僅能用手機回郵件、查天氣，還能在手機上玩《糖果傳奇》(Candy Crush)或《部落戰爭》(Clash of Clans)。

This year, for the first time, mobile gamessales are predicted to be higher than those on consoles and PCs[REVISE EDS:SEPARATELY, NOT COMBINED]. But that is down to the creation of a vast newmarket, not the cannibalisation of an old one. Many of those playing games ontheir commute go home and switch on the Xbox One or PlayStation 4.

今年，預計移動遊戲的銷量將首次超越主機遊戲或電腦遊戲。但那要歸因於一個巨大的新市場被開發出來，而不是移動遊戲奪走了主機遊戲的市場。那些在下班路上玩遊戲的人，有很多回家後還會打開微軟Xbox One或索尼PlayStation 4等遊戲機。

The two genres are quite distinct. Mobilegames are friendlier — not least because their revenue model depends on playerssticking with them. They are often free to download, making money fromadvertising or in-app purchases. They often tend to focus on repetitive puzzlesor slow-building strategies, which lend themselves to small pockets of time andimprecise, stabby fingers.

這兩種遊戲截然不同。移動遊戲相對更友好些——主要因爲其盈利模式取決於玩家的忠誠。移動遊戲通常是免費下載的，其收入來源於廣告或玩家購買遊戲內嵌的應用程序。移動遊戲很多都是那種重複性的闖關遊戲或需要慢慢構築的攻略，人們只要花些零碎時間動動手指就能玩。

Console games, however, need to justify thepurchase of the machine itself, at about ￡250, and of the game, at ￡30. So theytend to be epic — sweeping plots, gorgeous graphics, storylines that un-foldover many hours. (I have personally saved humanity at least a dozen times, andeach time it looked beautiful.) They often deal with war or its peacetimesubstitute, sport. And they demand precision and dedication, making them almostimpenetrable to anyone who did not start playing as a teen.

主機遊戲則不然，需要人們考慮值不值得買，一臺遊戲機大概要250英鎊，遊戲也要30英鎊。這些遊戲往往如史詩一般恢弘——廣闊的場景地圖、絢麗的視覺效果、各異的故事主線動輒就耗掉數小時。（我自己就至少拯救過人類十幾次，而且每次體驗都很棒。）有很多主機遊戲都設定爲戰爭場景，或選用戰爭在和平時期的替身——體育場景。主機遊戲需要精準度和專注度，除非像青少年一樣投入，不然基本搞不定它。

This brings us back to Baird and his greatinvention. Television did not kill the movie industry; we did not all decidethere was no point going out when we could watch what we wanted at ead, the mediums bifurcated: each focused on content suited to its s, like console games, can do spectacle in a way smaller screens ain America is a very different experience from Mad Men. So is Grand TheftAuto from Fruit Ninja.

我們回頭來說貝爾德和他偉大的發明。電視的問世並沒有令電影業消亡；不是所有人都認爲，既然在家想看什麼就能看什麼就沒有必要出門了。只是傳播媒介分化了：每種媒介只需專注適合其形式的內容。電影，就好比主機遊戲，能夠展現小屏幕無法表現的大場面。《美國隊長》(Captain America)呈現的觀感就和《廣告達人》(Mad Men)截然不同。《俠盜獵車手》(Grand Theft Auto)與《水果忍者》(Fruit Ninja)給人的體驗也不同。

That also means films and console games areopen to the same criticism: their high production values are a barrier toinnovation because so few companies can invest the tens of millions it takes tomake them. Hollywood is dominated by the Big Six studios, themselves owned byconglomerates, and the top-grossing films of last year — Star Wars Episode VII,Jurassic World and Avengers: Age of Ultron — are all sequels. In games, the2015 US bestseller list was topped by Call of Duty: Black Ops III (a sequel toa spin-off, no less). Minecraft was the only original title in the top 10.

那也意味着電影與主機遊戲面臨同樣的批評：二者高昂的製作成本成爲創新的障礙，因爲很少有公司能拿出上千萬投資來製作電影或開發遊戲。好萊塢有六大影業巨擘，各自隸屬於綜合性企業集團，去年票房顯赫的電影——《星球大戰7》(Star Wars Episode VII)、《侏羅紀世界》(JurassicWorld) 以及《復仇者聯盟2：奧創紀元》(Avengers: Age of Ultron) ——均爲續作。至於遊戲，2015年全美最暢銷的遊戲是《使命召喚：黑色行動3》(Call of Duty: Black Ops III)（依舊爲一個系列的續作）。位列前10的遊戲中只有沙盒遊戲Minecraft屬於初創。