Rethinking Gaming Motivations

[Patrick]

I sometimes think best while typing, and this is as good a place as
any to type, so I'll do it here.

Back in 1985 or so, I speculated in a published article that there
might be three main kinds of gamers--the Competitor, Socializer, and
Dreamer. Over the years, I picked up more information and encountered
more people, and it started looking like maybe there was a fourth
type, so I came up with this (from my BGG profile page):

To me, there are four main things one can get out of playing games:
1. plan and execute strategy or solve puzzles--exercise the mind;
2. interact with people--socialize, compete, trade, negotiate, etc.;
3. gamble or make plays for a tactical edge--try to beat the odds;
4. enjoy the theme/narrative--participate in an imaginary world.

Numbers 1, 2, and 4 correspond to my original Competitor, Socializer,
and Dreamer respectively, while 3 is new--or so I thought.

But I've been getting some feedback on that pet theory that now has me
thinking that 1 and 2 are closely connected for many gamers. And often
3 is strongly involved too. Only 4 seems to be a separate thing in the
minds of many.

One thing I'm picking up is that competitive gamers often see their
primary motivation as--how shall I put it?--the opportunity to test
themselves against challenges posed by other human minds. Thus,
they'd perceive a game of solitaire very differently from a game of
bridge, even though there's "strategy" and "puzzle solving" involved
in both. A large percentage of the more competitive gamers I meet are
very much into "playing the players"--and some of them would never be
happy playing against a computer AI or a solitaire mechanism.

Yet, there's another kind of gamer who's also very insistent on having
other people at the table: the kind I originally called the
Socializer. This type isn't especially competitive; to him, a game is
just an excuse to get together with friends and do something fun and
structured. He'll aim to win, but he's not going to work hard at it--
and he might even "throw the game" rather than risk spoiling the
social harmony by ruthlessly trouncing other players.

And some of those Socializers are also Dreamers, to go back to my
early terms. If it's an RPG or wargame or some other strongly themed
game, they enjoy the shared make-believe.

In short, there appear to be a lot of overlaps in my original scheme--
and even in my revised one. So many overlaps that I'm no longer sure
my classifications have much merit.

Still, I intuitively sense that there are some grains of truth in all
this--if only I could sort it all out.

Off the top of my head, right now I'm thinking that there are three
main "pulls" on gamers, and most individuals will tend to be pulled
toward at least two of the three. The three "pulls" pretty well
correspond to my original categories--Competitor, Socializer, and
Dreamer.

One "pull" (Competitor) is toward playing to win--overcoming
challenges. Another (Socializer) is toward interacting with other
people. And another (Dreamer) is toward escape--into the safe,
structured space of a game or even into the make-believe of a theme.

But most people will not be pulled toward just one of those things,
but usually toward at least two. And maybe it comes out something like
this:

Competitor-Socializer: Enjoys "playing the players"--imposing
challenges on other human minds and dealing with the challenges others
impose.

Competitor-Dreamer: Enjoys escaping into a private realm and working
out the "puzzles" imposed by the game system while also perhaps
enjoying the game's theme.

Socializer-Dreamer: Enjoys sharing an "escape" experience with others,
likely involving an absorbing theme (e.g., in RPGs).

These three combinations--at least at this moment--correspond better
to the real-life gamers I know than my original types do.

I'd class myself as clearly a Competitor-Dreamer in this scheme.

[Peter Clinch]

I find my wants from a game change with time/mood. A week ago I was
playing highly competitive Go in a tournament. There are other times
when I don't want to play anything that hard/serious. There are times
when I want lots of luck, some times I don't want any. Sometimes I want
to play people, some times I don't.

One of the points of having a big selection is to allow one to tune the
recreation to the mood. Looking at possible new purchases these days I
look for a game that does things not available in my collection, not
that does similar things in alternative ways.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.c...@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

[John McLeod]

On Fri, 4 Jun 2010, Patrick <p55ca...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Competitor-Socializer: Enjoys "playing the players"--imposing
>challenges on other human minds and dealing with the challenges others
>impose.
>
>Competitor-Dreamer: Enjoys escaping into a private realm and working
>out the "puzzles" imposed by the game system while also perhaps
>enjoying the game's theme.
>
>Socializer-Dreamer: Enjoys sharing an "escape" experience with others,
>likely involving an absorbing theme (e.g., in RPGs).
>
>These three combinations--at least at this moment--correspond better to
>the real-life gamers I know than my original types do.
>
>I'd class myself as clearly a Competitor-Dreamer in this scheme.

I'm a competitor-socializer mostly. Also I like the fact that according
to your new scheme, any two gamers are likely to have something in
common (either the competitor, socializer or dreamer aspect of their
orientation)!

However I am wondering how gamblers fit into this scheme - I mean people
whose enjoyment comes from the thrill of winning or losing money at
Roulette, Blackjack, Craps, Keno and the like. I have no interest at all
in that kind of gaming, so it's difficult for me to get deep into the
motivation for it, but it's clear from the success of the casino
industry that there are be plenty of gamers of this type.
--
John McLeod For information on card games visit
jo...@pagat.com http://www.pagat.com/

[Patrick]

On Jun 7, 6:37 am, John McLeod <j...@pagat.com> wrote:
> However I am wondering how gamblers fit into this scheme - I mean people
> whose enjoyment comes from the thrill of winning or losing money at
> Roulette, Blackjack, Craps, Keno and the like. I have no interest at all
> in that kind of gaming, so it's difficult for me to get deep into the
> motivation for it, but it's clear from the success of the casino
> industry that there are be plenty of gamers of this type.
> --
> John McLeod                      For information on card games visit

> j...@pagat.com                  http://www.pagat.com/


Well, if we speak of game playing in the broadest sense, I'm pretty
sure my little scheme only covers a certain subset.

Besides gambling, there's also sports. Children's games might be
something else as well. And maybe there are other games that aren't
coming to mind right now ("adult" games just popped into my head, for
instance, and dexterity games, and TV game shows, which sometimes
include performance games).

I suppose my thinking was limited to board and card games generally
played by older children and adults for the sake of intellectual or
emotional satisfaction.

If one is playing a game in hopes of winning money, for physical
exercise, to channel childish exuberance into some kind of elementary
learning, or for some other reason, to my mind we're talking about a
whole different kind of game playing. I've never been much interested
in those other kinds of game playing, so I must have inadvertently
blanked them out of my thinking altogether.

--Patrick