My task for over the last week and weekend was to research more player types; the player types we had previously chosen (Heeter, C) were not suitable for the achievement types we had researched and decided to use in our project. Therefore we decided to have a group meeting and discuss other possible player types which could be used in our project. Before the meeting the group assigned the role to further research into Player types to me, and this is what I found:

– Heeter, C. Et al (2011) “Beyond player types: Gaming achievement goal”.

This document talks about there being two types of achievement goals, and these are: ‘performance’ goals, or ‘Mastery’ goals. Performance goals seek to demonstrate their ability and avoid demonstrating inability in comparison to others. Mastery goals are motivated to gain and collect achievements, regardless of others. Performance goals work more in a gaming environment, and mastery goals work more in a school/educational environment.
The document then breaks these two achievement goals into 5 player types, being 4 based on the achievement goal types, and one control variable; superachievers, mastery-only, performance-only, and non-achievers are the main 4 player types, and explorer player types are the control variable.

Upon further reading of this document, we as a group have found that the player types suggested in this document will not produce the results we want, as they do not intertwine with the achievement types; the idea was to link certain achievement types to a player type, however with these player types we feel it won’t work very well.


– Bartle, R. (1996) “Hearts, Clubs, Diamonds, Spades: Players who suit MUDS”

“So, labelling the four player types abstracted, we get: achievers, explorers, socialisers and killers. An easy way to remember these are to consider suits in a conventional pack of cards: achievers are Diamonds (they’re always seeking treasure); explorers are Spades (they dig around for information); socialisers are Hearts (they empathise with other players); killers are Clubs (they hit people with them).”
This is a quote taken from Bartle’s paper; he defines four player types, and explains them. Achievers seek to obtain achievements in a game environment, Explorers explore the world as much as they possibly can (this can be proven by adding achievements to do with exploration), Socialisers play the game online or with real-life friends and killers are players set out to cause distress and try to break games for their enjoyment.
These player types and their definitions are really useful; however the socialisers’ player type would be ignored in our project, as we are aiming to create a single-player racing game. When we create a questionnaire to help us determine our samples’ player type, we can use his questionnaire as a reference to our own. (


– Klug, G.C. & Schell, J. (2006). “Why People Play Games: An Industry Perspective.”In Varderer, P. & Bryant, J. (Eds.), Playing Video Games: Motives, Responses, and Consequences (pp.91-100). Nahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assiciates.

“Most players are a combination of two or more of the following player types, the motivations meshing together in various combinations, often changing emphasis depending on what game they are playing (Klug, 2006).”

Player types
1. The Competitor (Similar to Bartle’s ‘Socialiser’)
The competitor player to be better than other players (Klug, 2006).

2. The Explorer (Similar to Bartle’s ‘Explorer’)
The explorer plays to experience the boundaries of the play world. S/he plays to discover first what others do not know yet (Klug, 2006).

3. The Collector (Similar to Bartle’s ‘Explorer’)
The collector plays to acquire the most stuff through the game (Klug, 2006).

4. The Achiever (Similar to Bartle’s ‘Achiever’)
The Achiever plays to not only be better now, but also to be better in rankings over time. He plays to attain the most championships over time (Klug, 2006).

5. The Joker (Similar to Bartle’s ‘Killer’)
The Joker plays for the fun along and enjoys the social aspects (Klug, 2006).

6. The Director (Similar to Bartle’s ‘Socialiser’)
The Director plays for the thrill of being in charge. He wants to orchestrate the event (Klug, 2006).

7. The Storyteller
The Storyteller plays to create or live in an alternate world and build narrative out of that world (Klug, 2006).

8. The Performer (Similar to Bartle’s ‘Socialiser’)
The Performer plays for the show he can put on (Klug, 2006).

9. The Craftsman
The Craftsman plays to build, solve puzzles, and engineer constructs (Klug, 2006).


After showing my findings and explaining each of these player types, as a group we decided we should make a hybrid set of player types and take the ‘achiever’ type from Bartle. In addition to taking the ‘non-achiever’ from Heeter, C. We also decided that if we were to use these player types, we should find out what player types we have in our predicted sample (university students), and we would develop a questionnaire based on Bartle’s player types questionnaire and tweak it to be focused towards the achiever/non-achiever player type. So I spent the last half of this week creating a questionnaire which could help us to see what percentage of university students in the games department are achievers or non-achievers. The reason for this questionnaire is to see if testing for player types was worth it.


GO TO WEEK 10 – HUGE CHANGE TO PROJECT! We changed the direction of the project and what we are looking for. (Nailing down the project idea and goals).


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: