Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Euld]

Link!

Found a fascinating article that was referenced in an Extra Credits episode.  It's very intriguing, practically a game designer's goldmine.  It explains a lot about why my friends and I like certain games but not others.  Or why some of us enjoy certain games, and others don't like certain ones.  I'm a Spade (Explorer).  In every game, I'm very interested in maps, how to utilize skills in interesting ways, and exploring the game's world.  If someone puts an empty shack in the middle of a field, you bet your britches I'll be the first one there to take a look inside.

edit: tried to post this as a poll, but refused to work :/

[Max White]

Rather interesting.
I'm guessing that would put me very much in the explorer category. Still, a valuable article! I will keep all that in mind.

[PsyberianHusky]

Killers says things like:

        "Ha!"
        "Coward!"
        "Die!"
        "Die! Die! Die!"
....
All of the credibility he generated up to that point, lost.

[Pnx]

Interesting, I've done a bit of everything, I started as an achiever, tried a bit of killing(never got really into it), and shifted more towards exploring, and then took an interest in socializing (though still being mainly an explorer).
I feel this does over-categorize things a bit, and I know I still drift between roles a lot... Except killing, I enjoy the thrill of a high stakes hunt, but I dislike seeing other people lose... also I kinda suck.

Killers says things like:

        "Ha!"
        "Coward!"
        "Die!"
        "Die! Die! Die!"
....
All of the credibility he generated up to that point, lost.

... Believe it or not I heard all these things exclaimed when someone was trying to kill me.

[Grimshot]

.

[Arni]

Being here in the Bay12Games - Home of DwarfFortress - forums I guess all people here will have tendencies towards explorer.

Interesting article. Thanks for sharing

[nenjin]

Some interesting takes on how you manipulate game design to encourage/discourage the different types.

[Cecilff2]

Killers says things like:

        "Ha!"
        "Coward!"
        "Die!"
        "Die! Die! Die!"
....
All of the credibility he generated up to that point, lost.

[RedKing]

I'm somewhere between Achiever and Explorer. Although not so much what he's talking about of exploring in the "hacking/modding/reverse-engineering the code" (although I certainly do that too) as in the literal exploration. I'm that guy who spends an hour trying to find an uncharted path over the mountains in Morrowind.

I also enjoy developing a potent character build in RPG's, though I'm not a min-max'er. I was proud of my nigh-unkillable tank in City of Heroes/Champions Online, at least until they nerfed some powers and suddenly made him into the Mighty Marshmallow Man.

[Muz]

At first, I thought this was another snooty article by a game designer trying to sound educated and overtheorizing, but gave it a look anyway. Yeah, turns out it's an old classic. If you've just discovered Bartle's theory, you should pick up some of Chris Crawford's books on game design

I remember reading that a long time ago I think. I'm somewhere between an achiever and an explorer.

 Killers says things like:

        "Your money or your life!"
        "lol, noob."
        "Hacker"
        "F*** you, you're not good."

 In my experience at least. I've been told every one of those except for the first one, never been robbed in a game before. I plan to use that one someday though.

Lol, you haven't played a heavy RP game. You have killers who are there for the sake of killing, and killers who like to kill in a roleplay context and find any lame excuse to do so.

I'm a Social-Achiever-Killer. Basically, I love RP games, I love unlocking new stuff in those games, and when I get bored, I play the raider-griefer-troll.

[Euld]

Looked up Chris Crawford, the reviews on Amazon.com said he was a bit "meh."  And a bit behind the times.  At this point, I suspect most of what I need to learn about game design will be during my actual schooling.  Oh yeah, and thanks for the responses, especially the ones about killers (I'd call them PvPers these days).

[woose1]

I'm a Social-Achiever-Killer. Basically, I love RP games, I love unlocking new stuff in those games, and when I get bored, I play the raider-griefer-troll.

Every single round of Space Station 13 ever.

[mainiac]

I don't fit any of these (probably closest to explorer).  Maybe that's why I suck at MUDs.

[Heron TSG]

Spoiler: Tangential! Biohazard! (click to show/hide)

Socialisers like achievers, because they provide the running soap opera about which the socialisers can converse. Without such a framework, there is no uniting cause to bring socialisers together (at least not initially). Note that socialisers don't particularly enjoy talking to achievers (not unless they can get them to open up, which is very difficult); they do, however, enjoy talking about them. A cynic might suggest that the relationship between socialisers and achievers is similar to that between women and men...

Well gee, that IS cynical. Also sexist. RAGH.

It was quite informative, and the categories make a lot of sense. I've always loved analyzing gamers, it's one of the reasons I like being my D&D group's DM. They're playing the game, but I'm playing them.

Spoiler: Tangential! Biohazard! (click to show/hide)

It could be argued that killers do have a positive role to play from the point of view of socialisers. There are generally two defences made for their existence: 1) without killers, socialisers would have little to talk about; 2) without evil as a contrast, there is no good. The former is patently untrue, as socialisers will happily talk about anything and everything; it may be that it helps provide a catalyst for long conversations, but only if it isn't an everyday occurrence. The second argument is more difficult to defend against (being roughly equivalent to the reason why God allows the devil to exist), however it presupposes that those who attack other players are the only example of nasty people in a MUD. In fact, there is plenty of opportunity for players of all persuasions to behave obnoxiously to one another; killers merely do it more openly, and (if allowed) in the context of the game world.

Oh hey, and we could have a religious argument with that sexism argument. This article may not be entirely 'scholarly', IMO.

[Haspen]

According to this silly thing, I would be somewhere on the Achiever-Explorer line