The Bartle taxonomy of player types is a classification of video game players (gamers) based on a 1996 paper by Richard Bartle[1] according to their preferred actions within the game. The classification originally described players of multiplayer online games (including MUDs and MMORPGs), though now it also refers to players of single-player video games.
The taxonomy is based on a character theory. This character theory consists of four characters: Achievers, Explorers, Socializers, and Killers. These are imagined according to a quadrant model where the X axis represents preference for interacting with other players vs. exploring the world and the Y axis represents preference for interaction vs. unilateral action.[2]
A test known as Bartle Test of Gamer Psychology based on Bartle's taxonomy was created in 1999–2000 by Erwin Andreasen and Brandon Downey, containing a series of questions and an accompanying scoring formula.[3][4][5][6] Although the test has met with some criticism[7] for the dichotomous nature of its question-asking method, as of October 2011, it had been taken over 800,000 times.[8][9] As at February 2018, the Bartle Test of Gamer Psychology hosted by GamerDNA is no longer available. Alternative online implementations of the test exist, however. [10]
The result of the Bartle Test is the "Bartle Quotient", which is calculated based on the answers to a series of 30 random questions in the test, and totals 200% across all categories, with no single category exceeding 100%.[11] (Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bartle_taxonomy_of_player_types)
https://public-media.interaction-design.org/images/ux-daily/587f9579039d8.jpg
You can read more about the types of players here:
https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/article/bartle-s-player-types-for-gamification
So, which type of gamer are you? Take the test here:
http://matthewbarr.co.uk/bartle/
---------------------------
I am
80% Achiever
What Bartle says:
Achievers regard points-gathering and rising in levels as their main goal, and all is ultimately subserviant to this. Exploration is necessary only to find new sources of treasure, or improved ways of wringing points from it. Socialising is a relaxing method of discovering what other players know about the business of accumulating points, that their knowledge can be applied to the task of gaining riches. Killing is only necessary to eliminate rivals or people who get in the way, or to gain vast amounts of points (if points are awarded for killing other players).
You are also:
60% Explorer
33% Socialiser
27% Killer
Thus I only kill potatoes to fry them :grin::grin:
The taxonomy is based on a character theory. This character theory consists of four characters: Achievers, Explorers, Socializers, and Killers. These are imagined according to a quadrant model where the X axis represents preference for interacting with other players vs. exploring the world and the Y axis represents preference for interaction vs. unilateral action.[2]
A test known as Bartle Test of Gamer Psychology based on Bartle's taxonomy was created in 1999–2000 by Erwin Andreasen and Brandon Downey, containing a series of questions and an accompanying scoring formula.[3][4][5][6] Although the test has met with some criticism[7] for the dichotomous nature of its question-asking method, as of October 2011, it had been taken over 800,000 times.[8][9] As at February 2018, the Bartle Test of Gamer Psychology hosted by GamerDNA is no longer available. Alternative online implementations of the test exist, however. [10]
The result of the Bartle Test is the "Bartle Quotient", which is calculated based on the answers to a series of 30 random questions in the test, and totals 200% across all categories, with no single category exceeding 100%.[11] (Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bartle_taxonomy_of_player_types)
https://public-media.interaction-design.org/images/ux-daily/587f9579039d8.jpg
You can read more about the types of players here:
https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/article/bartle-s-player-types-for-gamification
So, which type of gamer are you? Take the test here:
http://matthewbarr.co.uk/bartle/
---------------------------
I am
80% Achiever
What Bartle says:
Achievers regard points-gathering and rising in levels as their main goal, and all is ultimately subserviant to this. Exploration is necessary only to find new sources of treasure, or improved ways of wringing points from it. Socialising is a relaxing method of discovering what other players know about the business of accumulating points, that their knowledge can be applied to the task of gaining riches. Killing is only necessary to eliminate rivals or people who get in the way, or to gain vast amounts of points (if points are awarded for killing other players).You are also:
60% Explorer
33% Socialiser
27% Killer
Thus I only kill potatoes to fry them :grin::grin:
Explorers delight in having the game expose its internal machinations to them. They try progressively esoteric actions in wild, out-of-the-way places, looking for interesting features (ie. bugs) and figuring out how things work. Scoring points may be necessary to enter some next phase of exploration, but it's tedious, and anyone with half a brain can do it. Killing is quicker, and might be a constructive exercise in its own right, but it causes too much hassle in the long run if the deceased return to seek retribution. Socialising can be informative as a source of new ideas to try out, but most of what people say is irrelevant or old hat. The real fun comes only from discovery, and making the most complete set of maps in existence.
Killers get their kicks from imposing themselves on others. This may be "nice", ie. busybody do-gooding, but few people practice such an approach because the rewards (a warm, cosy inner glow, apparently) aren't very substantial. Much more commonly, people attack other players with a view to killing off their personae (hence the name for this style of play). The more massive the distress caused, the greater the killer's joy at having caused it. Normal points-scoring is usually required so as to become powerful enough to begin causing havoc in earnest, and exploration of a kind is necessary to discover new and ingenious ways to kill people. Even socialising is sometimes worthwhile beyond taunting a recent victim, for example in finding out someone's playing habits, or discussing tactics with fellow killers. They're all just means to an end, though; only in the knowledge that a real person, somewhere, is very upset by what you've just done, yet can themselves do nothing about it, is there any true adrenalin-shooting, juicy fun.
