Game Design Theory -- Pt 3: Player Psychological Types (and The Big Five)

[Dark Holy Elf]

I don't suppose anyone will be surprised to learn I prefer playing Smash with items either on Very Low (with particularly game-changing items such as heart containers and starmen banned entirely) or None. Or that I think one of the many excellent features of FFT and WA XF is that their damage is completely non-random (outside crits which don't even apply to many forms of damage). I think FFT is extra brilliant in that it uses numbers (zodiac and faith) to generate what at first appears to be randomness in its damage, but in fact it is all there for you to figure out if you want... so a casual, "bowl through everything" approach will maintain the seeming randomness, but if you really want to plan things out, you can.

Setup randomness helps limit the "flowchartness", I feel. Also, limited and identifiable random elements such as hit rates are also perfectly acceptable and indeed can create some extra thinking on the fly... though I'd like FFT a lot less if everything had, say, 50-60% hit rates, so you can go too far with this. (Mostly a knock on some styles of D&D here!)

[NotMiki]

Setup randomness helps limit the "flowchartness", I feel. Also, limited and identifiable random elements such as hit rates are also perfectly acceptable and indeed can create some extra thinking on the fly... though I'd like FFT a lot less if everything had, say, 50-60% hit rates, so you can go too far with this. (Mostly a knock on some styles of D&D here!)

Yeah, for tactics games, hit rates that low are well outside the "fun zone."  ARE YOU LISTENING FFTA???

[Hunter Sopko]

Everyone knows tactics and strategy are totally based on a lack of randomness in battles! </mandatory semi-serious troll comment>

I can get where people are coming from here. To you, stuff like that isn't fun. But... I have to side with Grefter and Jim on this one. I'll stick to the SRPG example though, if people don't mind. NEB is right in terms of damage in battle needing to be somewhat predictable to a given point (example, everyone pretty much knows what a bullet will do to you). That point is of course different for people. My thought is that it shouldn't really be until you attack a unit the first time. Knowing what you'll do to something BEFORE you attack it the first time seems counterintuitive. I'd prefer if more SRPGs left you in the dark until then (with things being relatively consistant after that point). Sure, you can put in skills for more veteran units to give you a good estimate, but honestly a game that would truly trigger the fight or flight response would be interesting to me.

Some people might find a game in which retreat is a viable and even necessary option sometimes unfun, but eh. Very few wars have been won by winning every single battle. I think at this point it's necessary to give objectives more complex than "Win Battle" to progress the genre. Of course, probably requires better AI, better planning/scripting/writing, etc. I guess it would take a special kind of game to implement this correctly, but at this point we SHOULD be asking more of our game producers.

Pretty much goes with my whole "Putting strategy back in SRPGs" thing. There aren't that many games that truly force strategic thinking that the DL has played, by and large. There's Brig, GoC, probably missing some. It's not about winning the battle, it's about winning the war. Winning the battle is tactics. FFT, for example is way too linear, and while you're kept appraised of how you fit into the larger war effort, it's all about the next battle, and restricts your long-term planning as such. There's very little actual strategy there going by Clauswitz's definition. Plug FFT's engine into, GoC's map system and you instantly have the potential for an amazing fucking game (which they sort of kinda did with Brig!). Technology pretty much limited the scale this was able to be implemented on. But as it progresses, so should the genre.

[metroid composite]

Ok, let's start digging into his findings.  I have to write a lot of this from memory, so I'll do sets of facets at a time, starting with openness to experience.

Imagination. To imaginative individuals, the real world is often too plain and ordinary. High scorers on this scale use fantasy as a way of creating a richer, more interesting world. Low scorers are on this scale are more oriented to facts than fantasy.

The correlation he's found so far is between the fantasy/realism levels of a game.  And note that people might play games for different reasons (like Alex plays WRPGs not for the nonlinear parts) but the parts of the world that appeal to people tend to related to their imagination score.

Artistic Interests. High scorers on this scale love beauty, both in art and in nature. They become easily involved and absorbed in artistic and natural events. They are not necessarily artistically trained nor talented, although many will be. The defining features of this scale are interest in, and appreciation of natural and artificial beauty. Low scorers lack aesthetic sensitivity and interest in the arts.

The question here was a very simple "do you appreciate the art/visuals of games".  And even for someone like me with a 1 in this category, I will very occasionally see something in a game and stop and think "ooh, that looks pretty."

Emotionality. Persons high on Emotionality have good access to and awareness of their own feelings. Low scorers are less aware of their feelings and tend not to express their emotions openly. Your level of emotionality is average.

This one seems to correspond to the level of melodrama that people enjoy in their game storylines.  (This was the part in his talk where he brought up the case of someone with 0 in emotionality who said "it's not OK if characters cry."  I'm actually curious to see if there's a link between people who like Valkyrie Profile and this one.  (Certainly one of Super's big complaints about the game is how Lenneth gets too EMO in the A-ending).

Adventurousness. High scorers on adventurousness are eager to try new activities, travel to foreign lands, and experience different things. They find familiarity and routine boring, and will take a new route home just because it is different. Low scorers tend to feel uncomfortable with change and prefer familiar routines. Your level of adventurousness is low.

Yeah, already discusssed this one.  Open World vs here's a known system to play with.

Intellect. Intellect and artistic interests are the two most important, central aspects of openness to experience. High scorers on Intellect love to play with ideas. They are open-minded to new and unusual ideas, and like to debate intellectual issues. They enjoy riddles, puzzles, and brain teasers. Low scorers on Intellect prefer dealing with either people or things rather than ideas. They regard intellectual exercises as a waste of time. Intellect should not be equated with intelligence. Intellect is an intellectual style, not an intellectual ability, although high scorers on Intellect score slightly higher than low-Intellect individuals on standardized intelligence tests.

This one he just linked with "Do you like puzzles in games/puzzle games".  And note that this doesn't necessarily mean "puzzles", like the BS that Zelda games make you do.

Liberalism. Psychological liberalism refers to a readiness to challenge authority, convention, and traditional values. In its most extreme form, psychological liberalism can even represent outright hostility toward rules, sympathy for law-breakers, and love of ambiguity, chaos, and disorder. Psychological conservatives prefer the security and stability brought by conformity to tradition. Psychological liberalism and conservatism are not identical to political affiliation, but certainly incline individuals toward certain political parties.

So...........this one he was trying, and failing to link to "do you prefer storylines which confirm the ancient wisdom of the past, or storylines that overthrow a regime", and was getting back answers of "Does it matter?" from pretty much the entire spectrum.

My stance on this one is that I'd like to see him test for "when you get a new game/sequel, do you want it to be exactly like an old favourite, or do you want it to innovate as much as possible."  Specifically I'm thinking of those fans that...every series seems to accumulate, who are dead convinced that the first game in the series is still the best after all these years (when they're obviously wrong) and try to convince the developers to make a new game exactly like the first one.  I'm looking at you: Suikoden...Wild Arms...etc.  This is pretty distinctive behaviour, and one that's repeated across multiple fanbases who don't necessarily know or even acknowledge each other, so...it'd be cool if there was a pattern that could be measured.

[SnowFire]

My personality type is "I think I know my own personality well enough already and don't feel the need to take a quiz to have a psuedo-authority figure tell me what it thinks."  At least if that quiz takes longer than 90 seconds.

Getting to the more interesting drops discussion...  in general, I'm a fan of rigged probability.  e.g. something like what Fire Emblem: Shadow Dragon did for stat growth rates, but even stronger.  Are you "behind" in skill?  Okay, you get a 10% bonus to that growth rate, and that will become a 30 and 50% bonus eventually if a character falls further and further behind some "minimum."  For MMO type drops, that means that I'd be cool with a 1% drop rate on the axe of killing everything instantly, but after you run that raid 6 times, you get a "You are obviously grinding this raid dungeon, please select one of the following 10 rare drops to be awarded to you, oh and it'll be soulbound / non-tradeable so that this method of grinding is strictly for you, not for gold-farmers."  For single-player RPGs...  I dunno.   Rare unusually powerful equips can be flavorful and interesting, sure, but should either be guaranteed to get and then balanced around (FF5 legendary weapons, say), or be handed out sparingly.  A 2% drop rate is a swingy way of implementing this, a la your FF4 / FF12 rare equipment.  So...  pregenerate at the beginning of the game which cool rare equipment you will get this playthrough, and have that be practically guaranteed, but no more.  That way every playthrough will see some amount of broken, but it'll be different broken and mix things up.  (Because completionists exist, ideally there should be some kind of aftergame where you can collect all the broken stuff and be happy, of course, but irrelevant for the main game.)

[Sierra]

Just noticing this thread, haven't read full discussion yet, etc. But here are more scores for now. TL;DR, just because the Cid is ignoring you doesn't mean he dislikes you.

Extraversion 1 (Friendliness 0/Gregariousness 0/Assertiveness 1/Activity Level 1/Excitement-Seeking 0/Cheerfulness 0)

Agreeableness 91 (Trust 61/Morality 97/Altruism 8/Cooperation 91/Modesty 94/Sympathy 98)

Conscientiousness 51 (Self-Efficacy 33/Orderliness 76/Dutifulness 85/Achievement-Striving 19/Self-Discipline 24/Cautiousness 71)

Neuroticism 86 (Anxiety 87/Anger 81/Depression 75/Self-Consciousness 92/Immoderation 39/Vulnerability 89)

Openness 64 (Imagination 96/Artistic Interest 58/Emotionality 4/Adventurousness 0/Intellect 55/Liberalism 99)

[Fenrir]

I've done the test but honestly the results sometimes seemed really inaccurate at times (for example, lower than average cheerfulness instead of really high) so I haven't saved the results.

From what I remember:


- Adventurousness and achievement striving were both really low, but I like playing all different kind of games and doing challenge playthroughs.


-

'Imagination. To imaginative individuals, the real world is often too plain and ordinary. High scorers on this scale use fantasy as a way of creating a richer, more interesting world. Low scorers are on this scale are more oriented to facts than fantasy.
The correlation he's found so far is between the fantasy/realism levels of a game.  And note that people might play games for different reasons (like Alex plays WRPGs not for the nonlinear parts) but the parts of the world that appeal to people tend to related to their imagination score.'

High imagination. I prefer realism in video games overall (I prefer stories taking place on earth, people not doing crazy jumps, etc), but this might be because most games I play have a lot of fantasy in them.


-

"Emotionality. Persons high on Emotionality have good access to and awareness of their own feelings. Low scorers are less aware of their feelings and tend not to express their emotions openly.
This one seems to correspond to the level of melodrama that people enjoy in their game storylines.  (This was the part in his talk where he brought up the case of someone with 0 in emotionality who said "it's not OK if characters cry."  I'm actually curious to see if there's a link between people who like Valkyrie Profile and this one.  (Certainly one of Super's big complaints about the game is how Lenneth gets too EMO in the A-ending)."

Low emotionality and I love Valkyrie Profile. To be fair I think I'm aware of my own feelings but don't express them openly at all. I don't see why those two things are supposed to be linked.

-

"    Adventurousness. High scorers on adventurousness are eager to try new activities, travel to foreign lands, and experience different things. They find familiarity and routine boring, and will take a new route home just because it is different. Low scorers tend to feel uncomfortable with change and prefer familiar routines. Your level of adventurousness is low.
Yeah, already discusssed this one.  Open World vs here's a known system to play with."

Really low adventurousness. I do prefer closed systems to open worlds overall, but I'm open to both kind of games.


-

"    Intellect. Intellect and artistic interests are the two most important, central aspects of openness to experience. High scorers on Intellect love to play with ideas. They are open-minded to new and unusual ideas, and like to debate intellectual issues. They enjoy riddles, puzzles, and brain teasers. Low scorers on Intellect prefer dealing with either people or things rather than ideas. They regard intellectual exercises as a waste of time. Intellect should not be equated with intelligence. Intellect is an intellectual style, not an intellectual ability, although high scorers on Intellect score slightly higher than low-Intellect individuals on standardized intelligence tests.
This one he just linked with "Do you like puzzles in games/puzzle games".  And note that this doesn't necessarily mean "puzzles", like the BS that Zelda games make you do."

Average intellect, average interest in puzzles. Depends on the game. Layton and WA3 puzzles are good, but I don't enjoy playing Crazy Machines for hours.

- 

"Liberalism. Psychological liberalism refers to a readiness to challenge authority, convention, and traditional values. In its most extreme form, psychological liberalism can even represent outright hostility toward rules, sympathy for law-breakers, and love of ambiguity, chaos, and disorder. Psychological conservatives prefer the security and stability brought by conformity to tradition. Psychological liberalism and conservatism are not identical to political affiliation, but certainly incline individuals toward certain political parties.
So...........this one he was trying, and failing to link to "do you prefer storylines which confirm the ancient wisdom of the past, or storylines that overthrow a regime", and was getting back answers of "Does it matter?" from pretty much the entire spectrum."

High liberalism, but that really has to be taken with a grain of salt. I agree that it doesn't/shouldn't matter anyway.

[DjinnAndTonic]

EXTRAVERSION...............99
..Friendliness..99..Gregariousness..99..Assertiveness..74..Activity Level..34..Excitement-Seeking..98..Cheerfulness..99

SHOCK! Djinn is Extraverted! But apparently I like staying in as much as I like going out?

AGREEABLENESS..............59
..Trust..47..Morality..4..Altruism..90..Cooperation..61..Modesty..23..Sympathy..98

Average Agreeableness. It makes sense. I'm all about doing things that make others happy and I feel bad when others are not happy. However, screw Modesty and Morality (or at least whatever this test deems as 'Moral'). Again, not very shocking. My attitude towards "Trust" is that I genuinely think that most people are inherently good, but also inherently selfish and lazy, so I can depend on them for as much as it benefits -them-, but don't assume they'll go out of their way to screw me.

CONSCIENTIOUSNESS..........31
..Self-Efficacy..70..Orderliness..32..Dutifulness..22..Achievement-Striving..33..Self-Discipline..44..Cautiousness..20

Hmm... man, it's good thing I have high self-efficacy or I'd -never- get anything done! Low Cautiousness is also pretty obvious, I suppose.

NEUROTICISM................48
..Anxiety..80..Anger..53..Depression..26..Self-Consciousness..28..Immoderation..49..Vulnerability..56

Hmm... kind of a wash of average here. Low Depression, but high Anxiety. I'm kind of surprised that Immoderation isn't higher and that Self-Consciousness isn't lower...

OPENNESS TO EXPERIENCE.....98
..Imagination..96..Artistic Interests..82..Emotionality..82..Adventurousness..71..Intellect..91..Liberalism..94

Oh man, I was not expecting THIS! Djinn? Open to new experiences?! What is this madness? ;)

Not sure how all of this relates to my gaming preferences, but I figured I'd throw in a more extraverted bit of sampling data.

[AndrewRogue]

Belated. I'll talk about these later.

EXTRAVERSION...............33
..Friendliness.............62
..Gregariousness...........65
..Assertiveness............37
..Activity Level...........2
..Excitement-Seeking.......2
..Cheerfulness.............72

Your score on Extraversion is average, indicating you are neither a subdued loner nor a jovial chatterbox. You enjoy time with others but also time alone.

AGREEABLENESS..............69
..Trust....................91
..Morality.................22
..Altruism.................57
..Cooperation..............84
..Modesty..................18
..Sympathy.................86

Your high level of Agreeableness indicates a strong interest in others' needs and well-being. You are pleasant, sympathetic, and cooperative.

CONSCIENTIOUSNESS..........5
..Self-Efficacy............33
..Orderliness..............16
..Dutifulness..............17
..Achievement-Striving.....0
..Self-Discipline..........2
..Cautiousness.............38

Your score on Conscientiousness is low, indicating you like to live for the moment and do what feels good now. Your work tends to be careless and disorganized.

NEUROTICISM................97
..Anxiety..................96
..Anger....................87
..Depression...............65
..Self-Consciousness.......84
..Immoderation.............99
..Vulnerability............99

Your score on Neuroticism is high, indicating that you are easily upset, even by what most people consider the normal demands of living. People consider you to be sensitive and emotional.

OPENNESS TO EXPERIENCE.....42
..Imagination..............84
..Artistic Interests.......38
..Emotionality.............78
..Adventurousness..........0
..Intellect................39
..Liberalism...............50

Your score on Openness to Experience is average, indicating you enjoy tradition but are willing to try new things. Your thinking is neither simple nor complex. To others you appear to be a well-educated person but not an intellectual.

[Grefter]

And you wonder why you are always cast as the submissive.

[metroid composite]

Ok, moving on...

Concientiousness:

He actually labels the whole of this group as "challenge", not just the individual facets, which I find interesting, as some of them don't seem to have a strong correlation

Self-Efficacy. Self-Efficacy describes confidence in one's ability to accomplish things. High scorers believe they have the intelligence (common sense), drive, and self-control necessary for achieving success. Low scorers do not feel effective, and may have a sense that they are not in control of their lives.

This one apparently does line up fairly directly with difficulty.

Orderliness. Persons with high scores on orderliness are well-organized. They like to live according to routines and schedules. They keep lists and make plans. Low scorers tend to be disorganized and scattered.

So...this one is kind-of interesting.  He has two questions for this one:

1. Do you want things in the game to be on a grid?
2. If you have an incomplete set, do you strive to get the last piece?

For instance, I have a fairly average score in orderliness, and I love grids, and hate set completion.  So...yes, subdivisions of facets!

Dutifulness. This scale reflects the strength of a person's sense of duty and obligation. Those who score high on this scale have a strong sense of moral obligation. Low scorers find contracts, rules, and regulations overly confining. They are likely to be seen as unreliable or even irresponsible.

So...this one he seems to line up with stuff like...let's say you play WoW and are in a guild.  Do you show up for scheduled raids?  Does the sense of social obligation feel comforting or stressful to you?

Achievement-Striving. Individuals who score high on this scale strive hard to achieve excellence. Their drive to be recognized as successful keeps them on track toward their lofty goals. They often have a strong sense of direction in life, but extremely high scores may be too single-minded and obsessed with their work. Low scorers are content to get by with a minimal amount of work, and might be seen by others as lazy.

Do you like/care about getting shiny gold stars that you can show to other people?

Self-Discipline. Self-discipline-what many people call will-power-refers to the ability to persist at difficult or unpleasant tasks until they are completed. People who possess high self-discipline are able to overcome reluctance to begin tasks and stay on track despite distractions. Those with low self-discipline procrastinate and show poor follow-through, often failing to complete tasks-even tasks they want very much to complete.

He's found a strong correlation between this one and grinding--whether people do grinding, and whether they like grinding.

Cautiousness. Cautiousness describes the disposition to think through possibilities before acting. High scorers on the Cautiousness scale take their time when making decisions. Low scorers often say or do first thing that comes to mind without deliberating alternatives and the probable consequences of those alternatives. Your level of cautiousness is average..

His question for this one was a fairly straightforward "do you want a rocket launcher, or a silenced pistol?"

[metroid composite]

Extraversion

A lot of this one has been mapped to stuff like online multiplayer and how you react to people.  It would be interesting, however, to see how a lot of these map to singleplayer games.  For instance, in other game psychological research I've seen, (see: autonomy, competence, relatedness, as well as Nicole Lazaro's work) a feeling of social worth and social interaction could be stimulated through AI and NPCs.  Something to speculate on/think about, anyhow.

Friendliness. Friendly people genuinely like other people and openly demonstrate positive feelings toward others. They make friends quickly and it is easy for them to form close, intimate relationships. Low scorers on Friendliness are not necessarily cold and hostile, but they do not reach out to others and are perceived as distant and reserved.

So...this is an interesting one.  I kind-of blew his curve here, because I score low on friendliness, and yet I will chat with people and make smiley faces to them in online games.  I feel like there's a big difference, for me, between socializing on the internet (where I am much less reserved) and socializing in real life.

Gregariousness. Gregarious people find the company of others pleasantly stimulating and rewarding. They enjoy the excitement of crowds. Low scorers tend to feel overwhelmed by, and therefore actively avoid, large crowds. They do not necessarily dislike being with people sometimes, but their need for privacy and time to themselves is much greater than for individuals who score high on this scale.

To use me as an example (very ungregarious) I love teamwork, and love working in teams, but like...teams of 3 or 4 are plenty.  I think 2v2 is an excellent format in pretty much every game, but the thought of, say, a 40-person raid in an MMO just sounds like chaos.

So actually, here's an interesting note: I like a lot of one-player games that have large casts (Valkyrie Profile, FFT, Fire Emblem, Advance Wars: Dual Strike) but I'm wondering if I would actually like them more if they had smaller casts.  Although...those games don't have too many people in any one scene.  Now, Suikoden 2, on the other hand, often felt like chaos to me, with a giant castle full of people.  I remember feeling mildly uneasy during the castle sections, and more comfortable when taking 6 characters into a dungeon.  But I might be reading too much into this.

Assertiveness. High scorers Assertiveness like to speak out, take charge, and direct the activities of others. They tend to be leaders in groups. Low scorers tend not to talk much and let others control the activities of groups.

Again, easily mapped to online experiences.  Do you want to be a clan leader?  Would you rather have someone tell you what to do?

It would not surprise me if there WAS a single-player mapping for this one.  Metroid is jumping to mind as a potential example--modern Metroid games (starting with Prime and Fusion) pinged the map for you on where to go next.  And this really angered a section of the old-school Metroid fanbase.

Activity Level. Active individuals lead fast-paced, busy lives. They move about quickly, energetically, and vigorously, and they are involved in many activities. People who score low on this scale follow a slower and more leisurely, relaxed pace.

I'm going to have to ping Jason for more detailed notes on this one, as I'm having trouble remembering from memory.

I believe he had linked it to the quantity of activities offered.  (So GTA would have a high quantity, and Touhou would have a low quantity).

Excitement-Seeking. High scorers on this scale are easily bored without high levels of stimulation. They love bright lights and hustle and bustle. They are likely to take risks and seek thrills. Low scorers are overwhelmed by noise and commotion and are adverse to thrill-seeking.

He linked this one with high-action thrill-seeking aesthetics.  So like...Resident Evil 4 kind of stuff I guess.

Which...well...actually, I think there might be an issue with the standardized test being used here.  A lot of the questions were stuff like "would you do an activity that might get you injured?" (in my case: what?  No, why would I do that?)  But does that mean I avoid games with flashes and explosions?  Err...no, there's no real risk, it's a game.

Cheerfulness. This scale measures positive mood and feelings, not negative emotions (which are a part of the Neuroticism domain). Persons who score high on this scale typically experience a range of positive feelings, including happiness, enthusiasm, optimism, and joy. Low scorers are not as prone to such energetic, high spirits.

In my case, at least (very cheerful) this was linked with stuff like Lilka hitting people with umbrellas and Yumei doing the chicken dance.

Actually, here's an interesting point: apparently some of the people who are into the 95+ (or 5-) range of the scale become kind-of snobs of that facet.  Like...when he asked me "would you preorder a game that you thought had something like this" I was like "Well...I guess I would if I knew, but I can only think of about five games with stuff like this."  Which is to say, in retrospect I guess there are a lot of games with cheerful themes, but damn it, they just can't compare to chicken dancing mermaids.

[Grefter]

Extraversion

Excitement-Seeking. High scorers on this scale are easily bored without high levels of stimulation. They love bright lights and hustle and bustle. They are likely to take risks and seek thrills. Low scorers are overwhelmed by noise and commotion and are adverse to thrill-seeking.

He linked this one with high-action thrill-seeking aesthetics.  So like...Resident Evil 4 kind of stuff I guess.

Which...well...actually, I think there might be an issue with the standardized test being used here.  A lot of the questions were stuff like "would you do an activity that might get you injured?" (in my case: what?  No, why would I do that?)  But does that mean I avoid games with flashes and explosions?  Err...no, there's no real risk, it's a game.

I kind of have to disagree with it being a problem with the standardised test though.  It will still map to your personality in a real world situation (do you like Racing in real life for example?  Watching or participating and the like).  I do agree that there might be more to mapping it in games though due to them being by nature a low risk activity.

You are probably likely to find it have some correlation with other facets and the kinds of games people play.  I figure it would be the kinds of people that have high engagement with games and get immersed in them with High Excitement Seeking are more likely to engage in games that get your adrenaline pumping (so your combat setpiece games like COD et al or your horror games if it aligns with other parts of their personality).

The biggest thing I suspect though?  Is you will find a smaller scope of games that they enjoy for a couple of reasons.  Primarilly being that this kind of personality isn't exactly one that I can see sitting down and enjoying a slow burning turn based game.  Probably not even RTS to be honest.  They just don't engage that part of the brain.  I mean SC2 is pretty intense activity and all that, but even at its most tense it hasn't engaged you quite like your First Person Shooters have. 

Secondarilly, I honestly expect people that are high on Excitement Seeking will tend not to be particularly hardcore gamers most of the time.  With it being such a low risk activity I honestly don't see how they could keep engaged to the same degree as those lower on the scale (I mean that is to some degree why half of us game or stuck with gaming right?).  I am sure there will be some that buck the trend of course (there always is outliers), but for the majority?  I fully expect that they have a genre or two that they have tried and like (probably FPS or some variation of shooter) and they stick with it.  They might be pro level at it of course, not saying they are bad, just not "hardcore" as in sinking 30 hours a week into it.

Also?  I honestly expect the Singleplayer gets more focus from them, mostly because Multi drifts back into the realm of low risk.  Doesn't matter what happens, it is just going to reset in 5 minutes.

[DjinnAndTonic]

Activity Level. Active individuals lead fast-paced, busy lives. They move about quickly, energetically, and vigorously, and they are involved in many activities. People who score low on this scale follow a slower and more leisurely, relaxed pace.

I'm going to have to ping Jason for more detailed notes on this one, as I'm having trouble remembering from memory.

I believe he had linked it to the quantity of activities offered.  (So GTA would have a high quantity, and Touhou would have a low quantity).

Just wanted to note that I think this one is spot-on and not nearly enough people talk about this facet of games. I tend to like high-Activity games that switch gameplay modes often and do at least one or two modes -extremely- well while interspersing them with other -related- tasks to keep things fresh and engaging. Games that I would have never expected to like - NieR and Mana Khemia come to mind - have ended up being some of my favorite games of all time despite not even focusing on the storytelling tropes that I tend to like.

Games that mix up the tasks -and- focus on my favorite tropes and gameplay styles of course end up being my "Djinn-bait" games - Disgaea, Suikoden, Tales.

Notably, my own lifestyle tends to be pretty uh... high-energy in both social and work-related fields. Sometimes I wish for a more steady schedule... but I think I'd end up very bored if it ever happened.

[metroid composite]

Activity Level. Active individuals lead fast-paced, busy lives. They move about quickly, energetically, and vigorously, and they are involved in many activities. People who score low on this scale follow a slower and more leisurely, relaxed pace.

I'm going to have to ping Jason for more detailed notes on this one, as I'm having trouble remembering from memory.

I believe he had linked it to the quantity of activities offered.  (So GTA would have a high quantity, and Touhou would have a low quantity).

Just wanted to note that I think this one is spot-on and not nearly enough people talk about this facet of games. I tend to like high-Activity games that switch gameplay modes often and do at least one or two modes -extremely- well while interspersing them with other -related- tasks to keep things fresh and engaging. Games that I would have never expected to like - NieR and Mana Khemia come to mind - have ended up being some of my favorite games of all time despite not even focusing on the storytelling tropes that I tend to like.

Games that mix up the tasks -and- focus on my favorite tropes and gameplay styles of course end up being my "Djinn-bait" games - Disgaea, Suikoden, Tales.

Notably, my own lifestyle tends to be pretty uh... high-energy in both social and work-related fields. Sometimes I wish for a more steady schedule... but I think I'd end up very bored if it ever happened.

Right, and similarly I'm just thinking of people like Elfboy where he wants his megaman to be megaman, and his RPGs to be RPGs, and games that try to do both and don't completely excel at one or the other (like modern Castlevanias) can just fuck off.

Or me, where I started to like TF2 less when they mixed inventory management and crafting into my pure and pristine shooter.  (Interestingly, though, my activity level score isn't excessively low.  In fact, I'm a little weirded out at how high it is at 32, now that I think about it.  That number seems suspect).

Secondarilly, I honestly expect people that are high on Excitement Seeking will tend not to be particularly hardcore gamers most of the time.  With it being such a low risk activity I honestly don't see how they could keep engaged to the same degree as those lower on the scale

Or maybe they play like...EVE Online, where at any moment you could be at risk of having hundreds of hours of work getting blown up by a PvPer.

Have I mentioned that I have an excitement seeking of zero, and basically would not play EVE Online even when I was working for CCP, in large part because the thought of getting blown up by someone much more powerful and losing all my stuff was just so very distasteful?

[Dark Holy Elf]

Right, and similarly I'm just thinking of people like Elfboy where he wants his megaman to be megaman, and his RPGs to be RPGs, and games that try to do both and don't completely excel at one or the other (like modern Castlevanias) can just fuck off.

Hey, Castlevania: Order of Ecclesia is one of my two favourite games from the past two years! That said it has figured out to excel at what it does, something the series once struggled with, so I think your comments are pretty spot on. Even within RPGs, I like plot games to excel at their plot and gameplay games to excel at their gameplay. If you can do both well, great (hi FFX) but generally speaking I prefer games that do an extremely good job at one (Grandia 3, Suikoden 5) over games that do a merely decent job at both, or worse waste time with aspects of RPGs I don't give a damn about like exploration and sidequests.

(I also quite like Portrait of Ruin, and I wouldn't say the other modern Castlevania games I've played can "fuck off" anyway; they're decent.)

[Grefter]

Secondarilly, I honestly expect people that are high on Excitement Seeking will tend not to be particularly hardcore gamers most of the time.  With it being such a low risk activity I honestly don't see how they could keep engaged to the same degree as those lower on the scale

Or maybe they play like...EVE Online, where at any moment you could be at risk of having hundreds of hours of work getting blown up by a PvPer.

Have I mentioned that I have an excitement seeking of zero, and basically would not play EVE Online even when I was working for CCP, in large part because the thought of getting blown up by someone much more powerful and losing all my stuff was just so very distasteful?

That is because you are a healthy sane human being.  For all that I love reading stories from 0 sec space, they are more akin to watching a soap opera than a thing I think normal minded people do.

That said given the barrier for entry Eve I wouldn't have pegged it as high Excitement seeking myself, but I suppose it must have some there.  Probably for the people that know other people and can jump straight to that area I suppose (join from SA forums, don't have to build up nearly as much reserve economy for example).  But even then, just the time investment to play Eve is pretty damned high.  I just can't see the path for engagement.  The end goal fits the personality trait.  I just don't see how the journey to it works.

On the other hand, there is the mantra of don't fly what you can't afford to lose.  So I dunno how high the excitement factor is when your risk is calculated to that level as one more facet of Eve being Accountants In Spaceships even when you step outside its Spreadsheets The Game territory.

As always, Eve is something of a cipher of a game that works brilliantly for its niche market and its niche market that is nigh unapproachable to outsiders.



Also I dunno if enjoying focussed design necessarilly has a great deal to do with Excitement Seeking, I think we have extrapolated a couple of steps down the chain of cause and effect here than the original intent of the comparison >_>.

That said, of course we like games that aren't as focused but are really well made.  People will play quality games outside their target genre or comfort zone.  Good design trumps market targets if you get the attention you deserve.

[metroid composite]

Agreeableness

Trust. A person with high trust assumes that most people are fair, honest, and have good intentions. Persons low in trust see others as selfish, devious, and potentially dangerous.

Trust and morality are interesting--in that one of them is how much you lie to others, and the other is how much you think others are lying.  Apparently these are completely separate.

So...the kind of gameplay where you wouldn't trust people would be stuff like the board game Risk.  What's even worse for high-trust people, though, is being betrayed in a way that feels like it's bending or breaking the rules.  (EVE Online is filled with this kind of stuff, where people will pretend to be an employee of the company, and ask the poor newbie to send them money for a guided tour).

Morality. High scorers on this scale see no need for pretense or manipulation when dealing with others and are therefore candid, frank, and sincere. Low scorers believe that a certain amount of deception in social relationships is necessary. People find it relatively easy to relate to the straightforward high-scorers on this scale. They generally find it more difficult to relate to the unstraightforward low-scorers on this scale. It should be made clear that low scorers are not unprincipled or immoral; they are simply more guarded and less willing to openly reveal the whole truth.

How much do you want to lie/betray others.

And...there's an interesting possibility for design space here, that isn't explored very often.  Most game situations like this are symmetrical--if you can betray someone, they can betray you back.  But some people are honest, but like mistrusting others, and some people are dishonest, but trust others.  Asymmetrical roles could potentially fill a niche for each of these demographics.

Altruism. Altruistic people find helping other people genuinely rewarding. Consequently, they are generally willing to assist those who are in need. Altruistic people find that doing things for others is a form of self-fulfillment rather than self-sacrifice. Low scorers on this scale do not particularly like helping those in need. Requests for help feel like an imposition rather than an opportunity for self-fulfillment.

Do you like being a healer, or more generally do you like support roles.

Cooperation. Individuals who score high on this scale dislike confrontations. They are perfectly willing to compromise or to deny their own needs in order to get along with others. Those who score low on this scale are more likely to intimidate others to get their way.

So...high cooperation tends to line up with people who like team games.  Low cooperation is generally labelled as competitiveness.  (Team competition tends to be high on the cooperation scale).

Modesty. High scorers on this scale do not like to claim that they are better than other people. In some cases this attitude may derive from low self-confidence or self-esteem. Nonetheless, some people with high self-esteem find immodesty unseemly. Those who are willing to describe themselves as superior tend to be seen as disagreeably arrogant by other people.

Do you like having a leaderboard, a spot where you can show off all your shiny gold stars and stuff?

Sympathy. People who score high on this scale are tenderhearted and compassionate. They feel the pain of others vicariously and are easily moved to pity. Low scorers are not affected strongly by human suffering. They pride themselves on making objective judgments based on reason. They are more concerned with truth and impartial justice than with mercy.

I don't remember the details on this one.  I think it had to do with being able to read characters.  Or...well no more like do you enjoy trying to read characters--being given dialogue options and having the choice change the course of the conversation or relationship.  That moment at the end of Phoenix Wright trials where you have to show a piece of evidence to cheer someone up.

Not sure what the impartiality group would be looking for, though.  Maybe "get those moments out of my game, and let's get back to the fun stuff like strategic planning."

[metroid composite]

Neuroticism

So...yeah, in general this one is just weird.  In the abstract, this one is how strongly people experience negative emotions.  But does a strong experience of negative emotions motivate people positively, or negatively?  Jason's findings so far are very inconclusive--people who experience fear strongly sometimes play scary games...sometimes completely avoid scary games.

Anxiety. The "fight-or-flight" system of the brain of anxious individuals is too easily and too often engaged. Therefore, people who are high in anxiety often feel like something dangerous is about to happen. They may be afraid of specific situations or be just generally fearful. They feel tense, jittery, and nervous. Persons low in Anxiety are generally calm and fearless.

People with high anxiety sometimes play Resident Evil, sometimes avoid Resident Evil.  People with low anxiety often have no interest in Resident Evil, but in some cases still have RE4 as their favourite game.

Anger. Persons who score high in Anger feel enraged when things do not go their way. They are sensitive about being treated fairly and feel resentful and bitter when they feel they are being cheated. This scale measures the tendency to feel angry; whether or not the person expresses annoyance and hostility depends on the individual's level on Agreeableness. Low scorers do not get angry often or easily.

The stuff he was trying to link this one to was like "do people enjoy frustration in games"--the kind of moments that make people throw their controller at the screen.  Again, hasn't found an obvious and clear correlation.

Depression. This scale measures the tendency to feel sad, dejected, and discouraged. High scorers lack energy and have difficult initiating activities. Low scorers tend to be free from these depressive feelings.

I don't even remember exactly what he was trying to link this one to--something about situations in games that feel hopeless?

Depression as related to gaming is interesting, anyway, because gaming is an activity.  When people are really dangerously depressed they won't even pick up a controller--they just don't feel like doing anything, whereas games are almost by definition active.  Speaking personally for a bit...when I've known people who have been depressed, usually it feels like there isn't much I can do, but...apparently one of the most effective things I've done was to just hang out with them and play games with them.

Self-Consciousness. Self-conscious individuals are sensitive about what others think of them. Their concern about rejection and ridicule cause them to feel shy and uncomfortable abound others. They are easily embarrassed and often feel ashamed. Their fears that others will criticize or make fun of them are exaggerated and unrealistic, but their awkwardness and discomfort may make these fears a self-fulfilling prophecy. Low scorers, in contrast, do not suffer from the mistaken impression that everyone is watching and judging them. They do not feel nervous in social situations.

So this one I can speak to a little.  Under the Self-Efficacy facet there is an Achievement Seeking category, and there's another facet for the humility/boastfulness, and these often line up well with whether or not people like XBox Live Achievements.  But people low in these categories mostly tend to feel indifference about achievements.

I hate XBox Live Achievements; I have not bought an XBox because of them.  And a big part of the reason is that I suspect I would only play two or three games on the XBox, and then have a really low gamerscore and everyone would think I was a bad gamer and laugh at me.

On the other hand, I don't mind, say, top 100 leaderboards.  I'm apparently one of the top 50 Starjewellers in North America, and I'm fine with that.

After much discussion, Jason and I concluded that hating XBox Live Achievements was most likely a manifestation of my self consciousness and not another facet.

(Now, does this reproduce itself consistently across other people with high self-consciousness?  I'm not sure).

Immoderation. Immoderate individuals feel strong cravings and urges that they have have difficulty resisting. They tend to be oriented toward short-term pleasures and rewards rather than long- term consequences. Low scorers do not experience strong, irresistible cravings and consequently do not find themselves tempted to overindulge.

People with high immoderation fall into two camps:

"Oh god, I can't play Farmville/WoW, I would waste years"
"Yeah, I play Farmville/WoW"

There's definitely something going on here--highly addictive personalities and how they treat highly addictive products.  But there doesn't seem to be a consistent pattern.

Vulnerability. High scorers on Vulnerability experience panic, confusion, and helplessness when under pressure or stress. Low scorers feel more poised, confident, and clear-thinking when stressed.

You know...I wonder if there might be a correlation here between this facet, and people who like going to tournaments, like being on stage and being under pressure to perform.

[Veryslightlymad]

EXTRAVERSION...............45
..Friendliness.............74
..Gregariousness...........35
..Assertiveness............65
..Activity Level...........6
..Excitement-Seeking.......16
..Cheerfulness.............81

AGREEABLENESS..............80
..Trust....................85
..Morality.................59
..Altruism.................86
..Cooperation..............84
..Modesty..................5
..Sympathy.................95


CONSCIENTIOUSNESS..........8
..Self-Efficacy............33
..Orderliness..............40
..Dutifulness..............22
..Achievement-Striving.....1 (SHOCK. AWE.)
..Self-Discipline..........8
..Cautiousness.............33


NEUROTICISM................77
..Anxiety..................84
..Anger....................38
..Depression...............91
..Self-Consciousness.......55
..Immoderation.............81
..Vulnerability............70

OPENNESS TO EXPERIENCE.....95
..Imagination..............84
..Artistic Interests.......73
..Emotionality.............98
..Adventurousness..........30
..Intellect................84
..Liberalism...............97

[Veryslightlymad]

For what it's worth, I have a low self-efficacy, but I like my games to be ball-crushingly difficult. Assuming they're not stupid difficult. I just wont grind, ever.

This one seems to correspond to the level of melodrama that people enjoy in their game storylines.  (This was the part in his talk where he brought up the case of someone with 0 in emotionality who said "it's not OK if characters cry."  I'm actually curious to see if there's a link between people who like Valkyrie Profile and this one.  (Certainly one of Super's big complaints about the game is how Lenneth gets too EMO in the A-ending).

I disliked Valkyrie Profile pretty hardcore, but for what it's worth, my favorite character in the game was Celia.

I'd attempt to link Modesty, or a lack thereof, to something along the lines of gimmick play. I often like to play games as stupid/silly as possible to see if I can still dominate a server. Only Headshot and Facestab Spy on Team Fortress (with no cloaking or disguising), beating a fighter only using kicks. Attempting to go for Kikoshou every hand in Mah-jong in that last game, et cetera.
Further edits on that last point: The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced I'm right. I like to let DICE decide what to do when I play certain RPGs. What area should I go to? Eh. Fuck it. I can handle any of it. I'll do it random. I'd rather role-play a hero than go for the ideal score. I randomize my race and my class every single time I start a new game on a roguelike. If I die to the PC in a fighting game I restart so I can clear it from the beginning.

[Scar]

EXTRAVERSION...............90
..Friendliness.............88
..Gregariousness...........87
..Assertiveness............44
..Activity Level...........70
..Excitement-Seeking.......91
..Cheerfulness.............90

Your score on Extraversion is high, indicating you are sociable, outgoing, energetic, and lively. You prefer to be around people much of the time.

AGREEABLENESS..............38
..Trust....................79
..Morality.................4
..Altruism.................57
..Cooperation..............54
..Modesty..................35
..Sympathy.................31

Your level of Agreeableness is average, indicating some concern with others' Needs, but, generally, unwillingness to sacrifice yourself for others.

CONSCIENTIOUSNESS..........1
..Self-Efficacy............24
..Orderliness..............33
..Dutifulness..............28
..Achievement-Striving.....4 
..Self-Discipline..........0
..Cautiousness.............0

Your score on Conscientiousness is low, indicating you like to live for the moment and do what feels good now. Your work tends to be careless and disorganized.

NEUROTICISM................25
..Anxiety..................12
..Anger....................35
..Depression...............15
..Self-Consciousness.......15
..Immoderation.............85
..Vulnerability............38

Your score on Neuroticism is low, indicating that you are exceptionally calm, composed and unflappable. You do not react with intense emotions, even to situations that most people would describe as stressful.

OPENNESS TO EXPERIENCE.....59
..Imagination..............81
..Artistic Interests.......86
..Emotionality.............22
..Adventurousness..........28
..Intellect................37
..Liberalism...............71

Your score on Openness to Experience is average, indicating you enjoy tradition but are willing to try new things. Your thinking is neither simple nor complex. To others you appear to be a well-educated person but not an intellectual.

[superaielman]

Extraversion

EXTRAVERSION...............62
..Friendliness.............58
..Gregariousness...........70
..Assertiveness............65
..Activity Level...........10
..Excitement-Seeking.......46
..Cheerfulness.............91

AGREEABLENESS..............60
..Trust....................65
..Morality.................65
..Altruism.................78
..Cooperation..............36
..Modesty..................37
..Sympathy.................59

CONSCIENTIOUSNESS..........89
..Self-Efficacy............75
..Orderliness..............72
..Dutifulness..............98
..Achievement-Striving.....74
..Self-Discipline..........80
..Cautiousness.............80

NEUROTICISM................25
..Anxiety..................38
..Anger....................27
..Depression...............17
..Self-Consciousness.......41
..Immoderation.............30
..Vulnerability............32

OPENNESS TO EXPERIENCE.....19

..Imagination..............54
..Artistic Interests.......11
..Emotionality.............58
..Adventurousness..........6
..Intellect................39
..Liberalism...............21

[Idun]

EXTRAVERSION 54 
Friendliness    58 
Gregariousness   43 
Assertiveness  53 
Activity Level  38
Excitement-Seeking 69
Cheerfulness 51

Your score on Extraversion is average, indicating you are neither a subdued loner nor a jovial chatterbox You enjoy time with others but also time alone

AGREEABLENESS 38
Trust    47
Morality   40
Altruism   46
Cooperation   1 
Modesty  84 
Sympathy   48

Your level of Agreeableness is average, indicating some concern with others' Needs, but, generally, unwillingness to sacrifice yourself for others.

CONSCIENTIOUSNESS 29 
Self-Efficacy   11 
Orderliness    73
Dutifulness   72 
Achievement-Striving   41 
Self-Discipline   19 
Cautiousness  4

Your score on Conscientiousness is low, indicating you like to live for the moment and do what feels good now. Your work tends to be careless and disorganized.

NEUROTICISM 77
Anxiety   77 
Anger    80 
Depression   85 
Self-Consciousness   40 
Immoderation   63
Vulnerability   71

Your score on Neuroticism is high, indicating that you are easily upset, even by what most people consider the normal demands of living. People consider you to be sensitive and emotional.

OPENNESS TO EXPERIENCE 71
Imagination    83
Artistic Interests   72
Emotionality    47
Adventurousness   71
Intellect   61
Liberalism   48

Your score on Openness to Experience is high, indicating you enjoy novelty, variety, and change. You are curious, imaginative, and creative.

My cooperation score makes sense. I have a problem with compromise.