Hello There, Guest! Login Register


Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
What sort of gamer are you?
#1
 x 0 


So back in the old days Richard Bartle theorised that when playing a multiplayer game online, there are 4 forms of motivation.

These are: 
Achievement: Fulfilling the explicit requirements of game quests/trophies/goals
Exploration:   Learning more about the game/understanding it's mechanics/seeking out hidden features
Killing:           Competing with and defeating other human players in the game. Also griefing I think.
Social:           Using the game as a platform for social interactions and just having a great time with others.

This concept was drawn from observing dungeon crawlery and that sort of thing, so it isn't necessarily relevant to all types of multiplayer game.
I think most people realise what sort of gamer they are without a flawed internet quiz, but here you are:

It's sort of an interesting idea, and you can see in many games they've got features that explicitly reach out to these perceived audiences, such as lists of "achievements", separate PvP areas for otherwise non-PvP games, options to make your character dance, and with every year and increasing volume of almost-hilarious easter eggs in nearly-cleverly concealed spots.

In games I quite enjoy, I think I find myself mostly exploring and some socialising. If I find myself just following quest requirements, normally that's a sign that I'm not truly enjoying the game's environment, and just waiting for it to get better or be over.  What about yous, forum friends?
 
Reply
#2
 x 0 


(22-02-2016, 06:52 PM)crispier taco Wrote: So back in the old days Richard Bartle theorised that when playing a multiplayer game online, there are 4 forms of motivation.

These are: 
Achievement: Fulfilling the explicit requirements of game quests/trophies/goals
Exploration:   Learning more about the game/understanding it's mechanics/seeking out hidden features
Killing:           Competing with and defeating other human players in the game. Also griefing I think.
Social:           Using the game as a platform for social interactions and just having a great time with others.

This concept was drawn from observing dungeon crawlery and that sort of thing, so it isn't necessarily relevant to all types of multiplayer game.
I think most people realise what sort of gamer they are without a flawed internet quiz, but here you are:

It's sort of an interesting idea, and you can see in many games they've got features that explicitly reach out to these perceived audiences, such as lists of "achievements", separate PvP areas for otherwise non-PvP games, options to make your character dance, and with every year and increasing volume of almost-hilarious easter eggs in nearly-cleverly concealed spots.

In games I quite enjoy, I think I find myself mostly exploring and some socialising. If I find myself just following quest requirements, normally that's a sign that I'm not truly enjoying the game's environment, and just waiting for it to get better or be over.  What about yous, forum friends?

Achiever: 40%
Explorer: 67%
Griefer: 40%
Socialiser: 53%

So I don't know? Realistically I'm primarily Achiever and Socialiser, but the questions were hilariously camp and obviously from a different era. 90s fantasy game tropes, ho!
İmage
 
Reply
#3
 x 0 


(22-02-2016, 11:13 PM)Selegraphon Wrote: Achiever: 40%
Explorer: 67%
Griefer: 40%
Socialiser: 53%

So I don't know? Realistically I'm primarily Achiever and Socialiser, but the questions were hilariously camp and obviously from a different era. 90s fantasy game tropes, ho!

Hahaha,
yeah the quiz kept offering two rubbish answers to a strange question. 

Achiever: 33%
Explorer: 60%
Griefer: 67%
Socialiser: 40% 

By the way, the quiz is out of 200%, and the max of any style you can be is 100%. 
I imagine my general playing style would depend on the game played... but maybe I play games that enable my preferred playing personality? Which is apparently dickhead explorer.
 
Reply
#4
 x 0 


(22-02-2016, 11:56 PM)crispier taco Wrote:
(22-02-2016, 11:13 PM)Selegraphon Wrote: Achiever: 40%
Explorer: 67%
Griefer: 40%
Socialiser: 53%

So I don't know? Realistically I'm primarily Achiever and Socialiser, but the questions were hilariously camp and obviously from a different era. 90s fantasy game tropes, ho!

Hahaha,
yeah the quiz kept offering two rubbish answers to a strange question. 

Achiever: 33%
Explorer: 60%
Griefer: 67%
Socialiser: 40% 

By the way, the quiz is out of 200%, and the max of any style you can be is 100%. 
I imagine my general playing style would depend on the game played... but maybe I play games that enable my preferred playing personality? Which is apparently dickhead explorer.

Do you also hate snakes?
İmage
 
Reply
#5
 x 0 


Heres mine:

Your gaming style is
Achiever: 47%
Explorer: 80%
Griefer: 27%
Socializer: 47%

Yeah I gotta agree about the questions. Some of the two options seemed so unrelated to the original question. Like a monster is attacking you, do you: A) fight it. B) make a sandwich in a totally different place unrelated from the monster. The site was all HTML buttons made in the 90s.

Still though I think my results are somewhat accurate. I am an explorer/completionist/socialist kind of guy, and my scores reflect that.


(22-02-2016, 11:56 PM)crispier taco Wrote: I imagine my general playing style would depend on the game played... but maybe I play games that enable my preferred playing personality? Which is apparently dickhead explorer.

Absolutely, different kind of games bring out a different kind of play style for sure. And I also agree that we tend (I tend) to play games of genres we like and suits our playing style.
Liams Wrote:make a car out of scrap metal from genie lamps

İmage


 
Reply
#6
 x 0 


(23-02-2016, 12:10 AM)Selegraphon Wrote: Do you also hate snakes?

especially if I can hear them
 
Reply
#7
 x 0 


"Would you rather
know where to find things?
know how to get things?"
I'm pondering life now......
 
Reply
#8
 x 1 


This is kinda similar to the Timmy-Johnny-Spike split in mtg!

http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/arc...2013-12-03

There are always cards every set (release of new cards) of mtg that appeal to each archetype specifically. The 'Johnny' cards will usually make you think "what the fuck", like this or "how can I build a deck around this card" , like this one. "Johnny" seems like the same concept as the "Exploration" player, and "Spike" similar to the "killing"/"griefer" player, but the "Achievement" player doesn't really apply to card games, and the "Socialiser" (read- c a s u a l) isn't related at all to game design while it does have a place in the original 4.
Personally I'm definitely a "griefer" first and foremost in online games, my favourite online experiences are always coordinated team plays and winning 1v1's, which is completely different to my motivation for card games...
 
Reply
#9
 x 0 


(01-03-2016, 09:42 PM)████ Wrote: "Would you rather
know where to find things?
know how to get things?"
I'm pondering life now......

How to get things seems infinitely better, because that would encompass where things are, as well as everything else necessary to acquiring said things. Assuming that the two aforementioned things are equal.
İmage
 
Reply
#10
 x 0 


(01-03-2016, 11:50 PM)Selegraphon Wrote:
(01-03-2016, 09:42 PM)████ Wrote: "Would you rather
know where to find things?
know how to get things?"
I'm pondering life now......

How to get things seems infinitely better, because that would encompass where things are, as well as everything else necessary to acquiring said things. Assuming that the two aforementioned things are equal.

The way the question is worded you'd have to assume the knowledge of how to get a thing is exclusive from where the thing is. I suppose it's supposed to split people between 'exploring' where something is and being able to 'achieve' something that you can see? But the lack of context makes it seem laughably deep.
 
Reply
  


Forum Jump:


Browsing: 1 Guest(s)