Post by Gerto on Nov 16, 2005 12:33:38 GMT -5
Richard Bartle expressed 4 types of motivations for people playing (online) games. The full article is at www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm , but I will summarize the motivations here:
1) Achievers are interested in doing things to the game, ie. in ACTING on the WORLD. It's the fact that the game environment is a fully-fledged world in which they can immerse themselves that they find compelling; its being shared with other people merely adds a little authenticity, and perhaps a competitive element. The point of playing is to master the game, and make it do what you want it to do; there's nothing intrinsically worthwhile in rooting out irrelevant details that will never be of use, or in idling away your life with gossip.
Achievers are proud of their formal status in the game's built-in level hierarchy, and of how short a time they took to reach it.
2) Explorers are interested in having the game surprise them, ie. in INTERACTING with the WORLD. It's the sense of wonder which the virtual world imbues that they crave for; other players add depth to the game, but they aren't essential components of it, except perhaps as sources of new areas to visit. Scoring points all the time is a worthless occupation, because it defies the very open-endedness that makes a world live and breathe. Most accomplished explorers could easily rack up sufficient points to reach the top, but such one-dimensional behaviour is the sign of a limited intellect.
Explorers are proud of their knowledge of the game's finer points, especially if new players treat them as founts of all knowledge.
3) Socialisers are interested in INTERACTING with other PLAYERS. This usually means talking, but it can extend to more exotic behaviour. Finding out about people and getting to know them is far more worthy than treating them as fodder to be bossed around. The game world is just a setting; it's the characters that make it so compelling.
Socialisers are proud of their friendships, their contacts and their influence.
4) Killers are interested in doing things to people, ie. in ACTING on other PLAYERS. Normally, this is not with the consent of these "other players" (even if, objectively, the interference in their play might appear "helpful"), but killers don't care; they wish only to demonstrate their superiority over fellow humans, preferably in a world which serves to legitimise actions that could mean imprisonment in real life. Accumulated knowledge is useless unless it can be applied; even when it is applied, there's no fun unless it can affect a real person instead of an emotionless, computerised entity.
Killers are proud of their reputation and of their oft-practiced fighting skills.
These motivations are not set in stone, people can show tendencies towards specific types, shift between them, show more than one type at a time, and generally change their motivations all together.
How do you feel these motivations stack up in light of D&D? Do you see your own game play style? Do these motivations grant us a better understanding of why people play games (D&D)?
Personally, I tend to be a Socializer. It might not be apparant in the PbP game here though. I enjoy reading everyone's posts, seeing people interact, and building relationships. I was especially sad to see Poppy go
I don't get too heavily involved in the exact details of dungeon delving. I prefer the banter inbetween moments of action to the action itself, fights serve to break up the pace.
I think its interesting that 1e prides itself on open-ended worlds, and that many people answered my previous poll saying they enjoyed "explorer" activities the most. So what do you think? Are 1e D&D players a certain type? What type motivates you?
1) Achievers are interested in doing things to the game, ie. in ACTING on the WORLD. It's the fact that the game environment is a fully-fledged world in which they can immerse themselves that they find compelling; its being shared with other people merely adds a little authenticity, and perhaps a competitive element. The point of playing is to master the game, and make it do what you want it to do; there's nothing intrinsically worthwhile in rooting out irrelevant details that will never be of use, or in idling away your life with gossip.
Achievers are proud of their formal status in the game's built-in level hierarchy, and of how short a time they took to reach it.
2) Explorers are interested in having the game surprise them, ie. in INTERACTING with the WORLD. It's the sense of wonder which the virtual world imbues that they crave for; other players add depth to the game, but they aren't essential components of it, except perhaps as sources of new areas to visit. Scoring points all the time is a worthless occupation, because it defies the very open-endedness that makes a world live and breathe. Most accomplished explorers could easily rack up sufficient points to reach the top, but such one-dimensional behaviour is the sign of a limited intellect.
Explorers are proud of their knowledge of the game's finer points, especially if new players treat them as founts of all knowledge.
3) Socialisers are interested in INTERACTING with other PLAYERS. This usually means talking, but it can extend to more exotic behaviour. Finding out about people and getting to know them is far more worthy than treating them as fodder to be bossed around. The game world is just a setting; it's the characters that make it so compelling.
Socialisers are proud of their friendships, their contacts and their influence.
4) Killers are interested in doing things to people, ie. in ACTING on other PLAYERS. Normally, this is not with the consent of these "other players" (even if, objectively, the interference in their play might appear "helpful"), but killers don't care; they wish only to demonstrate their superiority over fellow humans, preferably in a world which serves to legitimise actions that could mean imprisonment in real life. Accumulated knowledge is useless unless it can be applied; even when it is applied, there's no fun unless it can affect a real person instead of an emotionless, computerised entity.
Killers are proud of their reputation and of their oft-practiced fighting skills.
These motivations are not set in stone, people can show tendencies towards specific types, shift between them, show more than one type at a time, and generally change their motivations all together.
How do you feel these motivations stack up in light of D&D? Do you see your own game play style? Do these motivations grant us a better understanding of why people play games (D&D)?
Personally, I tend to be a Socializer. It might not be apparant in the PbP game here though. I enjoy reading everyone's posts, seeing people interact, and building relationships. I was especially sad to see Poppy go
I don't get too heavily involved in the exact details of dungeon delving. I prefer the banter inbetween moments of action to the action itself, fights serve to break up the pace.I think its interesting that 1e prides itself on open-ended worlds, and that many people answered my previous poll saying they enjoyed "explorer" activities the most. So what do you think? Are 1e D&D players a certain type? What type motivates you?
