Aisthesis

Hey guys,
Haka and I had this really cool discussion about the Bartle test the other day and it got me thinking about its shortcomings as well as the bias introduced by some of the test's more ambiguous questions. You can take it here, btw. Then I found an article talking about personality types in relation to video games (not just MMOs, which I found interesting).

I have scored rather ambiguously on the Bartle test thanks to methodological faults in its wording, but on my most recent score I placed in the following order from most to least with significant ordering: Killer, Achiever, Explorer, Socializer. I think the killer/achiever part of the hierarchy is unquestionable and my desire for explorer/social quotient varies depending on how I feel at the moment.

I have scored very unambiguously as an INTJ on every test I have taken including some which I feel have fairly worded questions--because it has corporate applications, the MBTI is taken more seriously even though, in the long run, personality analysis is literally just generalization and does not usually predict results.

Thus I had a lot of problems with both the straight-up Keirsey linkages, in which they classify all rationals including INTJs--ie, the personality type most likely to be a mustache-twirling villain/mastermind--as explorers who seek and value internal structure and genuine interaction with the game over what I would consider the satisfaction of the other side of the chart in either form, ie, acting on the game.

What I intuitively wanted was to map out the corners, not just the vectors, so I was happy when the article brought up a study that did just that and produced a chart that I found more realistic. A merge between strategic and logistical makes more sense for me because it pulls together an aspect of 'exploration' in its pure form--that is, the seeking of knowledge about the game, especially at a high level--with a type of achievement that goes beyond the boring, logistical side of the notion (because I'm not interested in grind without meaning). I'm now still very far away from an outright 'killer' on the chart, but it's a distance that makes sense because I'm not a 'pure' killer according to this analysis.

So if you scroll through a lot of wandering in the woodsy stuff, you come to a chart that classifies game types and how they should appeal to different sets of people. Here's where I feel things go slightly awry.

Sure enough, achiever/explorers love non-open-world crpgs, mmos, and shooter crpgs (cough, Mass Effect). But...what about turn-based strategy games? I enjoy nothing more than a good game of Civ II or AC in which I...uhh...pretend to play at diplomacy, build up my empire, and then murder my opponents while perpetuating horrible atrocities and then pretending that I'm sorry in front of the UN...

Clearly, playing a TBS game straight up appeals to a different sort of crowd, because even when I'm patient enough to want a different type of victory, I don't jive with the "this is all really hard and how do I maximize resources when I play on a soul-crushing difficulty level" or the "let's play a Civ game that goes on forever!" crowd. I want to finish, I want to achieve things, but I also enjoy building my bases, naming them, and then viciously protecting them from the other faction leaders.

Fire Emblem is probably a starker example because you can't really murder anyone besides your own units. I love Fire Emblem and I've played FE9 probably as many times as I've played ME1. I love doing weird things like playing with the worst units in the game just because I can, making Soren into a mage evade tank who can wade into a vulnerable spot and annihilate everyone who attacks him, or walking around levelling my healers with their stupid healing powers which need to be on adjacent units.

Anyway, I'm curious as to what people think. Are the personality tools accurate with regards to yourself and the games you tend to enjoy/have enjoyed in the past?

Well, I'm on the side of the test itself being worthless.

Achiever: 47%
Explorer: 53%
Griefer: 53%
Socializer: 47%

Possibly my total lack of interest in a game's story throws off a lot of the social and explorer questions. In addition, the achiever questions all seem focused on doing something first, which isn't the same as someone who just likes to get achievements.

In my opinion, they should have a 5th option: Completioner, making Achiever the externally competitive variant.

Achiever: 73%
Explorer: 20%
Griefer: 73%
Socializer: 33%

The bartle test works reasonably well for me, though I hate how binary some of the options are.

I like exploring, the bartle test skews it so that I'm some person who never explores and just likes killing and achieving. I DO like killing and achieving, but exploring tends to not conflict with that. I enjoy exploring specifically to kill people, or exploring to get a better idea about how to achieve something.

I'm a progression nut, any game that involves climbing some sort of ladder and getting new *skills* is very important to me, so in that aspect I am definitely an achiever. I think the lower socializer pisses me off because it's not accurate. I socialize a lot in MMOs especially, so when they ask a question like "If you find a hard monster and wanna kill it but can't, do you figure out a way to do it or grab your friends," I'm annoyed because I'd do both. I'd do the former first THEN grab friends if I'm bad. The achiever takes precedence, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't socialize. Context is important.

Also, I'm only an achiever in a single player setting when it comes to progressing through a game. I rarely play on higher difficulties because to me I don't see the value of it? MMOs are different because there are people around you to brag to, which I think skews the Bartle test a lot. Who's to say people aren't achievers because they're social?

They need something to differentiate between the achiever in the competitive sense and the achiever in the completionist sense, I agree with Kym

Socializer: 83%
Explorer: 47%
Achiever: 47%
Griefer: 20%

I find this to be relatively accurate...ish. However, I find the categories to be too broad. Also, a lot of the questions needed more choices, as I didn't really want to choose either one (or I wanted both answers equally) in a few cases.

Whenever I take a personality test it comes up with a completely different answer, but more often than not it's either ENTJ or INTJ.

40% Achiever
60% Explorer
40% Griefer
60% Socializer

I think ultimately, I would say I'm greedy because a lot of answers I wanted to answer both.

67% Achiever
53% Explorer
7% Griefer
73% Socializer

I would have to say that its pretty close to what I would have expected. Particularly the griefer part. I would say that the achiever and explorer probably should be slightly higher and the socializer slightly lower... but in the end I guess these three things are what I look for in a game... so I guess it works.

Its nice to get good at something... its better to do it with friends :)

Achiever: 20%
Explorer: 87%
Griefer: 33%
Socializer: 60%

Surprisingly accurate. As we discussed AJ. More or less just to put my results down.



Also, for the record:

Your Personality Test Results
You are E-N-T-P

Extroverted - Intuitive - Thinking - Perceiving (ENTP)


ENTP - The Visionary
Creative, resourceful, and intellectually quick. Good at a broad range of things. Enjoy debating issues, and may be into "one-up-manship". They get very excited about new ideas and projects, but may neglect the more routine aspects of life. Generally outspoken and assertive. They enjoy people and are stimulating company. Excellent ability to understand concepts and apply logic to find solutions.



Also a similar test that I've found fairly insightful. https://www.talentoday.com/users/ander-shultis/personality

thos questions look like a 14 year old wrote them......

#13201907 Jaberse wrote:

thos questions look like a 14 year old wrote them......

Jabs, is your rl name Thomas?

#13202067 Ander wrote:

#13201907 Jaberse wrote:

thos questions look like a 14 year old wrote them......

Jabs, is your rl name Thomas?

Is this somehow news?

#13202532 Ajantis wrote:

#13202067 Ander wrote:

#13201907 Jaberse wrote:

thos questions look like a 14 year old wrote them......

Jabs, is your rl name Thomas?

Is this somehow news?

Well, I never knew it. :P He has a bookmark that says "Welcome Thomas" tho. :P

My test results:

ENFP
Extravert(16%) iNtuitive(19%) Feeling(3%) Perceiving(31%)

You have slight preference of Extraversion over Introversion (16%)
You have slight preference of Intuition over Sensing (19%)
You have marginal or no preference of Feeling over Thinking (3%)
You have moderate preference of Perceiving over Judging (31%)

not sure what to make of them.