Re-play is a highly controversial concept of game development. The emphasis on re-play of developers is because we believe that players need it. The reason is that the greater the value of re-play a high game, so we should maximize the re-play of the game as a target. When the development and marketing AAA masterpiece cost up to $ 100,000,000, to ensure that the money is not white, the best way is to make users think so. The word itself implies an obvious meaning: in the entire process of repeated play, the game can keep the interest of the players. In fact, however, data show that players almost never from start to finish Wanbian our biggest game, let alone play on a few times.I consider the over-simplified the above re-play of the definition of several concepts, these concepts are worthy of careful scrutiny. For these concepts, a better explanation can help developers to improve the value of their players, to avoid to improve the game development costs in the face of "increasing the rs4play.

First of all, I think we must abandon the notion that replayability is to measure the indicators of the players game process or the player from start to finish the number of games Wanbian. "A Fistful of Dollars" is a re-play the game of very high, but I was shocked to discover that more than 40 percent of the players play to the end, more than 10 percent of the players get all achievements. Faced with these two figures, it is difficult to refute the replayability of the game is not enough to say. So we need a more tenable definition, lest we mistakenly thought it was to invest $ 100 000 000 to make a bad game, game test report said that the players did not complete the rs4play game.

From the theoretical point of view, I think that the best predictor of re-play of the "depth - depletion ratio. "Depth" in particular is a good balance between the richness of interconnection; "exhaustion", I mean the game on the dependence of the static content delivery information. The inherent requirements of this simple ratio, the more depth and less static content corresponds to higher re-play.Let's look at the classic game of chess or Go, because they are interconnect-rich game system balance, and virtually no content, so we can predict this ratio, they should have almost unlimited replayability. In fact it is. On the contrary, like the "Dragon's Lair" in these games, content-rich, but there is no systematic, almost no replayability. Once you play the best game content, the main character Princess Daphne kiss, re-play almost no sense.

In the modern game market, the depth - the rate of content tend to be more balanced, we can take the "civilization" as an example. The game contains a lot of content, deliver content to rely on the extremely rich system. A result, its replayability is also close to chess Go extent. In the field of multiplayer games, "civilized" (or other games) even more replayability, because human players is an integral element of the system space. If other factors are the same, ignoring the errors in the design of multiplayer games replayability always higher than the rs4play game.