Posts made by Zori

@Stacy555 said in Bartle's Taxonomy and this game.:

Oh I know I promised not to post anymore...... but you just proved your lack of any interest in anyone other than yourself or those that agree with you.....

" overanalyzing fun is probably a sure way to ruin it." lmao, you think this is 'over analysing'?
i do feel bad for you then. Have I insulted Stacy? if I have then thats
Her issue, not mine.

I'm a Man ..... Hilarious, oh and you're spelling is getting worse with every post, calm down.

Last post ... I promise.

Thanks for the input, Stace, now if you have anything intellectual to say you're more than welcome to post and respond to this thread.

Not that you've addressed anything that was said to you anyway.

"Oh dear lord .... a Gamer motivation profile .... damn I'd rather spend my time choosing a hairstyle that looks good in blue.... Motivation profile ... Really ?? ROTFFL !!!!!!"

Not dismissive at all. lmfao

@Gibbx now if you want to continue a discussion or if you feel comfortable enough to have something to add to this discussion, this was the last thing that I said to you.

@Zori said in Bartle's Taxonomy and this game.:

@Gibbx
Thats why we have 'science', so now you can have fun better by understanding what make things more fun for you.

but like I said, I'm not here to try and convince anyone to change their minds, I'm here to share what is out there and what we've learned over the years of developing games and the science behind it.

While most people are content with just being a 'consumer', I'm certain that there are others who are curious and wants to understand what's fun for them and how they can find more of the things that are fun for them.

The main reason why we're on the Alpha test is for the very specific reason of testing out both the internal mechanics and structure of the game and provide feedback upon it.

Peoples feedback are much more valued if they actually have an understanding of the science behind the idea of their fun, but alas as I said before, a lot of people just want to "try" the new and upcoming thing and if there's the thing that they didn't understand happened, they dislike it and provide a negative or non-contextual feedback.

I hope you understand the bigger picture out of this and not just your "I'm only here to have fun" when you can't even understand the layers of nuances involved in what's "fun" for you and how they relate to the game, and how you as an "Alpha tester" can provide feedback based upon it.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563219301153

Hopefully a quick read would enlighten you. I'm not expecting you to read it, nor to understand it but this information is available there for you.

So are you capable of having a productive discussion or would you rather ignore what other people are saying to you and just hear your own opinion?

I really hope you're much more than that, now you can have an actual discussion or you can continue being some sort of a quasi-social police, its your choice.

@Gibbx said in Bartle's Taxonomy and this game.:

@Zori overanalyzing fun is probably a sure way to ruin it. I am pretty sure you have insulted @Stacy555 and those of us who happen to agree with @Stacy555. You should probably apologize. Ok have 'fun' with your ongoing intellectual and articulate analysis. Out

" overanalyzing fun is probably a sure way to ruin it." lmao, you think this is 'over analysing'?
i do feel bad for you then. Have I insulted Stacy? if I have then thats her issue, not mine.

and just because you're incapable of some depth in your analysis doesn't mean others are incapable of it, perhaps if the topic is a little out of your depth, it'll help you out to read and learn as well so next time you'd feel a bit more confident to chime in with a well thought out analysis.

but i guess not all of us are willing to cross their comfort zone so they refuse to learn. I'll go have fun with my 'intellectual' analysis over here, when these things are pretty much surface level topic, but i guess that's too much for some people. If you got offended by a simple discussion, you're more than welcome to report/complain about it.

@Stacy555 said in Bartle's Taxonomy and this game.:

@Zori Wow ..... triggered much ?

You have a great knack of cherry picking the negative in every post and ignoring everything else, I'm done trying to have a debate with a such closed minded individual as yourself, feel free to respond, but this will you will be pleased to read will be my last post on this thread.

Chill out mate.

"negative in every post and ignoring everything else"
Have you not been reading anything that I wrote to you at all?

That is a typical attitude of someone who does not want to hear anything at all other than their own opinion, once they've been called out on their behaviour, they try to flip it around and act as if they were some sort of a victim.

Like I said to you before in response to your questions.

1. Why do I need theories - Already been addressed on my very first response to you.
   What did you respond with? - "I'm 63, am a gamer, been playing pong since 1972" Does that have anything to do with the topic? no.

2. "But as a "Gamer" first and foremost I need fun, followed by a sense of achievement, no matter that in the greater picture is actually meaningless, this is then taken to the next level by social involvement, welcome to the land of MMO."

Which is hilarious cause this was literally expanded on on the very first topic but ofc you missed it out cause you only read 6 lines, as a matter of fact many other players have commented on this as well but naturally you didn't see that, why? cause of assumptions that you already know everything.

Hence why I reiterated that players need to understand 'theories' and 'concepts' so they can be more articulate and not be limited to a "it's fun" vocabulary.

Once someone posted a response to ENLIGHTEN US ALL with a gamer profile, what did you respond with?

"Oh dear lord .... a Gamer motivation profile .... damn I'd rather spend my time choosing a hairstyle that looks good in blue.... Motivation profile ... Really ?? ROTFFL !!!!!!"

You tell me if that's someone keen on learning. Funnily enough once everyone contributed and did the profile, somehow you felt compelled to make your own lmao, ran out of time to choose a different hairstyle or something?

So what was the response that i've given to you? naturally i had to repeat myself in a simpler sense to get the point across, what did you respond with?

"You call it filling the gap, I call it "Diversity"....... And saying I'm not a dedicated gamer after nearly 50 years, is not only incorrect, but pretty insulting."

Did that actually addressed anything that I pointed out? again, no. Cause you're reading to respond not to understand, you know common attitude of people who are content with their minimal knowledge.

so now here we are with a simple summary, like i said before you lack critical analysis and that is why you keep asking the exact same questions over and over again cause you refuse to read and understand and would much prefer to hear the exact same things over and over again.

@Stacy555 said in Bartle's Taxonomy and this game.:

but if you continue to dismiss other peoples views on a subject, it's not them who will lack the ability to learn.

Oh that is rich lmfao
Yeah it's quite evident where you're really at, just have a read through your responses on this thread and you'll see where the "dismiss other peoples views on a subject" really lies.

Your perspective on things is, "I'm going to dismiss other peoples opinions, views and perspective and call this a 'difference' in opinion, but once my hypocrisy gets addressed, or if someone enlightens me with their view, i'm going to try and flip the narrative on them."

Know what that's called now a days? Schrodingers douche bag where a person says something stupid but then tries to take a moral high ground once they've been called out on it.

Now let's try to get back on topic.

Your question of "why do I need a theory or test" has already been answered, if you refuse to read through it to expand on that discussion then that's your deal. Not once your points were dismissed, as a matter of fact they were the very basis of my responses, you on the other hand would much prefer to read the 'first 6 lines' of a message then start talking as if they already know what its about, hence why they keep asking the exact same question over and over again.

It's why they never learn.

"What I have said on a few posts, that you continue to ignore, is that there is an element that is not represented by the test or it's results. That element "fun" is not a combination of 4 elements it's "more" and that for me is the part of the equation, If all games designed around theories and surveys, which as you have stated they are ?, then what makes one stand above another ? if not "The fun factor" ?"

and if you had just learned to read first before you ran your mouth, you'll learn that this was expanded on by many other players here, yet somehow you're the only person here who came in with the assumption that you already know everything.

@Stacy555 said in Bartle's Taxonomy and this game.:

I find it interesting that you only respond to my one liners, but when I make an effort to explain my position you ignore it completely ,? why would that be. ?

cause you've failed to address anything that i've pointed out to you so you can rebut with out of context remarks that does not encourage further discussion.

That is why you keep asking the exact same question of " why do I need a theory or test"
cause you respond not to understand the other persons perspective but to interject with your own.

Does that sound like someone with a growth mentality? or stagnated and are content with what they think they already know.

Now if you can address anything that i've said to you about why these theories and concepts exist and their importance, in a manner that is conducive to an intelligent discussion, i'll entertain your personal biases as it'll actually have some degree of weight.

and the mere fact that you think that i took offence to you using your age as a credential already shows where we're at.

I never took offence on anything, i pitied you for being unable to practice critical analysis; but what do i know, im just some 'college boy' playing a game.

@Stacy555 said in Bartle's Taxonomy and this game.:

It states the obvious", as I said why do I need a theory or test ??

If you keep asking that question then I guess we're back to square one.
I'll just let you re-read everything that you and I discussed and hopefully something sticks with you.

Good luck, i genuinely wish the best for you.

@Razvan

says the person who posts daily on the forums

If you look at the way I interact with people, it's kind of combative lmao
but I was surprised with the 'social' aspect on mine as i didn't fully understood what it meant.
The more I think about it though, it does makes sense why it was high; i am looking for an mmorpg after all lol

But perhaps the results don't have as much variation considering we're all generally interested in the same genre.

@Tuoni

I think one of the biggest failures of "older" studies are boxing everything to one category but now we're learning that everything is actually a scale.

Perhaps even more so now that at this day and age, vast majority of gamers have tried many different variety of games. Back then 'MMORPG' was just one big category but now we've begun to create sub-categories for it such as sandbox mmo, survival mmo, etc. etc.

This doesn't necessarily mean that old studies are obsolete though, it just means that we need to use it as a foundation so that we can easily understand the very basics of what they're teaching.

In the same sense that we look at Maslow's hierarchy of needs as overlapping aspects, we also gotta look at other concepts in an overlapping manner.

@Roccandil said in Bartle's Taxonomy and this game.:

@Zori said in Bartle's Taxonomy and this game.:

"credentialism is bullying" is an interesting perspective, but I think you'd find it really interesting how this 'credentialism' unfolded if you back read through this thread. I'm sure you'll find that people randomly dropping their many years of 'breathing' in this world out of context, in order to deny people or to shut down conversation to be quite 'interesting'.

How long someone has lived seems a valid argument if simply used to bolster what they've learned about what they themselves enjoy. After 50+ years, I'd think someone would know what they like!

Using credentials to say their point of view of what they enjoy is incomplete, imprecise, or ignorant seems clumsy at best (if not outright arrogant).

Oh, and I agree with the axiomatic assertion that games should be fun.

Some people may indeed enjoy analyzing why, and I'm not going to knock that (I do it myself), but some people may find that dissecting the fun spoils the fun, while still others may see the danger that analyses and models and marketing can obscure the fundamental concept of fun.

And at least in games, fun should never be forgotten.

How ignorant for a person to assume that there isn't much left to learn or understand just cause they've been doing something for a number of years.

No one disagreed to the statement that games should be fun, the discussion was being able to articulate what makes something 'fun', so that it can be better understood, replicated and fleshed out, so you know for games that are being developed, we can discuss things better and not just limit our vocabulary to "it's fun".

Sadly, people are getting caught up with certain keywords cause they're limited to certain ideologies.

but hey, what else can we expect from people who thinks that all they need is to be breathing and living, and does not have a need for articulating themselves.

@Tuoni said in Bartle's Taxonomy and this game.:

This gamer profile thing was really interesting and now when I have analyzed a little bit more the results, I have to say that it somewhat surprised me. Having Story only 21% is odd because I mainly like the story lines if game have those at first place. Having Social 52% could be less tbh and Action only 18% sounds pretty low. If I think Bartle's Taxonomy I guess I would put myself to Achiever category, however, I am kind of all around player why I see Bartle's theory kind of problematic, at least when thinking myself. Anyhow, most of the percentages are kind of what I expected but perhaps I waited more for the Achiever part, because achieving goals represents fun for me.

I was quite surprised myself that i scored quite high on social, but when I reflect upon it, on the broader perspective a lot of the activities that I enjoy tend to be socially oriented.

As for Bartle's Taxonomy, you gotta keep in mind that this was written and published more than 20 years ago. It became a cornerstone for many mmorpg theories but naturally, things have evolved overtime and more layers of nuances were uncovered through the years of studying and applying it so it wouldn't be 'fully' applicable for every situation, particularly with us who have peculiar/developed taste when it comes to mmorpgs. The technology has made leaps and bounds that allowed us to have/use concepts that weren't possible before.

@Roccandil said in Bartle's Taxonomy and this game.:

@Zori said in Bartle's Taxonomy and this game.:

@Stacy555

You might want to put a context on your response next time, but I suppose articulation doesn't come naturally for all of us, hence why education is highly encouraged.

You can feel insulted as much as you'd like, doesn't change the fact that things are more than just... "I'm only here to have fun" after 50 years? of gaming.

and if your only credential is your age, then hell you must be an expert at stone tools.

Games -are- about fun. Developers who forget or ignore that are either incompetent or exploitative.

Incidentally, credentialism is bullying. I respect vocational individuals who earn their living in reality far more than those who have learned through an insulated environment to parrot knowledge they did not discover, and use their credentials as a club against the non-credentialed.

One test of a truly learned individual is the ability to recognize and provide the next step of knowledge to someone else, and more importantly, the humility to accept the blame if they cannot transfer that knowledge.

It also helps to understand that we live in a universe so diversity dense it takes an army of specialists to begin to describe it. We may therefore assume everyone we meet has direct experiential knowledge of something we do not.

I've found that that point of view makes meeting new people interesting, especially since people in general like to talk about themselves.

"credentialism is bullying" is an interesting perspective, but I think you'd find it really interesting how this 'credentialism' unfolded if you back read through this thread. I'm sure you'll find that people randomly dropping their many years of 'breathing' in this world out of context, in order to deny people or to shut down conversation to be quite 'interesting'.

Sure, meeting new people with a different perspective is interesting, but there are some more interesting than others for sure.

Once again, i'd urge you to back read to some of this 'well learned' individuals comments regarding theories and concepts of this game and how they shouldn't matter at all and that only having fun is whats important.

Sadly they couldn't even articulate what the fun thing is for them, and understand how or why they find certain things engaging so when something they don't like happens, watch them flip out and throw a tantrum instead of understanding it.

@Stacy555

You might want to put a context on your response next time, but I suppose articulation doesn't come naturally for all of us, hence why education is highly encouraged.

You can feel insulted as much as you'd like, doesn't change the fact that things are more than just... "I'm only here to have fun" after 50 years? of gaming.

and if your only credential is your age, then hell you must be an expert at stone tools.

Now that we're all here I guess i'd pitch in too.

I wasn't expecting a high social score considering how i'm generally rough around the edges lol

@Meiki I definitely agree with this assessment, and I noticed from the Q&A and what the dev has said that it's going to lean towards that and that there isn't much thought/idea to stop this from happening.

I mean they're trying to make sure that everything is accessible by anyone, hence why "asteroid" mechanics were implemented but there's no denying that certain things are much easier to achieve with a guild, but the question is; where is the tipping point that it'll turn into, "you must join one to achieve those things."

@Gibbx

Thats why we have 'science', so now you can have fun batter by understanding what's make things more fun for you.

but like I said, I'm not here to try and convince anyone to change their minds, I'm here to share what is out there and what we've learned over the years of developing games and the science behind it.

While most people are content with just being a 'consumer', I'm certain that there are others who are curious and wants to understand what's fun for them and how they can find more of the things that are fun for them.

The main reason why we're on the Alpha test is for the very specific reason of testing out both the internal mechanics and structure of the game and provide feedback upon it.

Peoples feedback are much more valued if they actually have an understanding of the science behind the idea of their fun, but alas as I said before, a lot of people just want to "try" the new and upcoming thing and if there's the thing that they didn't understand happened, they dislike it and provide a negative or non-contextual feedback.

I hope you understand the bigger picture out of this and not just your "I'm only here to have fun" when you can't even understand the layers of nuances involved in what's "fun" for you and how they relate to the game, and how you as an "Alpha tester" can provide feedback based upon it.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563219301153

Hopefully a quick read would enlighten you. I'm not expecting you to read it, nor to understand it but this information is available there for you.

About 5 more days until deadline. I'm itching to give out rewards. Would be cool if the deadline coincides with the next alpha test or something.

^
Hope you understand that we're not living in 1960's or 1970's anymore where we just do things for the sake of doing things, we do things to understand them and relate them to the bigger picture.

Now we understand that games aren't just to 'blow off steam', we actually use it now for many aspects of our lives, learning is one of them.
But hey, it's not my role to try and convince people to see a bigger picture, or the 'science' of things. I just share what information is available and hope to enlighten others who are willing to learn; it's still up to them whether they expand their horizons or not, but there are those who are content with where they're at and that's none of my business.

But I do wonder though what game developers or even 'dedicated gamers' would think of comments like that who doesn't understand how or why things develop. I'm not saying some of us don't have certain qualities needed to be an 'alpha tester', but i'm also saying that there are certain qualities that you need to understand in game development to be a useful 'alpha tester' and not just one of those that 'fills in the gap'.

@Tuoni Yeah but i'd be sitting comfortably in my house with food, fire and entertainment while the peasants hang out outside my swamp.

@Recoil someones been playing Mordhau.