The Daedalus Project

Implementing the Assessment Tool

====

How interested are you in the precise numbers and percentages underlying the game mechanics? (i.e, chance of dodging an attack, the math comparing dual-wield to two-handed weapons, etc.)

Not Interested At All
Slightly Interested
Somewhat Interested
Very Interested
Extremely Interested

How important is it to you that your character is as optimized as possible for their profession / role?

Not Important At All
Slightly Important
Somewhat Important
Very Important
Extremely Important

How often do you use a character builder or a template to plan out your character's advancement at an early level?

Never
Seldom
Sometimes
Often
Always

Would you rather be grouped or soloing?

Much Rather Group
Rather Group
In-Between
Rather Solo
Much Rather Solo

How important is it to you that your character can solo well?

Not Important At All
Slightly Important
Somewhat Important
Very Important
Extremely Important

How much do you enjoy working with others in a group?

Not At All
A Little
Some
A Lot
A Great Deal

How much do you enjoy leading a group?

Not At All
A Little
Some
A Lot
A Great Deal

How often do you take charge of things when grouped?

Never
Seldom
Sometimes
Often
Always

How important is it to you to be well-known in the game?

Not Important At All
Slightly Important
Somewhat Important
Very Important
Extremely Important

How much time do you spend customizing your character during character creation?

Not At All
A Little
Some
A Lot
A Great Deal

How important is it to you that your character's armor / outfit matches in color and style?

Not Important At All
Slightly Important
Somewhat Important
Very Important
Extremely Important

How important is it to you that your character looks different from other characters?

Not Important At All
Slightly Important
Somewhat Important
Very Important
Extremely Important

How much do you enjoy exploring the world just for the sake of exploring it?

Not At All
A Little
Some
A Lot
A Great Deal

How much do you enjoy finding quests, NPCs or locations that most people do not know about?

Not At All
A Little
Some
A Lot
A Great Deal

How much do you enjoy collecting distinctive objects or clothing that have no functional value in the game?

Not At All
A Little
Some
A Lot
A Great Deal

1) Leveling up your character as fast as possible.

Not Important At All
Slightly Important
Moderately Important
Very Important
Tremendously Important

2) Acquiring rare items that most players will never have.

Not Important At All
Slightly Important
Moderately Important
Very Important
Tremendously Important

3) Becoming powerful.

Not Important At All
Slightly Important
Moderately Important
Very Important
Tremendously Important

4) Accumulating resources, items or money.

Not Important At All
Slightly Important
Moderately Important
Very Important
Tremendously Important

5) Knowing as much about the game mechanics and rules as possible.

Not Important At All
Slightly Important
Moderately Important
Very Important
Tremendously Important

6) Having a self-sufficient character.

Not Important At All
Slightly Important
Moderately Important
Very Important
Tremendously Important

7) Being immersed in a fantasy world.

Not Important At All
Slightly Important
Moderately Important
Very Important
Tremendously Important

8) Escaping from the real world.

Not Important At All
Slightly Important
Moderately Important
Very Important
Tremendously Important

1) Helping other players.

Not Enjoyable At All
Slightly Enjoyable
Moderately Enjoyable
Very Enjoyable
Tremendously Enjoyable

2) Getting to know other players.

Not Enjoyable At All
Slightly Enjoyable
Moderately Enjoyable
Very Enjoyable
Tremendously Enjoyable

3) Chatting with other players.

Not Enjoyable At All
Slightly Enjoyable
Moderately Enjoyable
Very Enjoyable
Tremendously Enjoyable

4) Competing with other players.

Not Enjoyable At All
Slightly Enjoyable
Moderately Enjoyable
Very Enjoyable
Tremendously Enjoyable

5) Dominating/killing other players.

Not Enjoyable At All
Slightly Enjoyable
Moderately Enjoyable
Very Enjoyable
Tremendously Enjoyable

6) Exploring every map or zone in the world.

Not Enjoyable At All
Slightly Enjoyable
Moderately Enjoyable
Very Enjoyable
Tremendously Enjoyable

7) Being part of a friendly, casual guild.

Not Enjoyable At All
Slightly Enjoyable
Moderately Enjoyable
Very Enjoyable
Tremendously Enjoyable

8) Being part of a serious, raid/loot-oriented guild.

Not Enjoyable At All
Slightly Enjoyable
Moderately Enjoyable
Very Enjoyable
Tremendously Enjoyable

9) Trying out new roles and personalities with your characters.

Not Enjoyable At All
Slightly Enjoyable
Moderately Enjoyable
Very Enjoyable
Tremendously Enjoyable

10) Doing things that annoy other players.

Not Enjoyable At All
Slightly Enjoyable
Moderately Enjoyable
Very Enjoyable
Tremendously Enjoyable

1) How often do you find yourself having meaningful conversations with other players?

Never
Seldom
Sometimes
Often
Always

2) How often do you talk to your online friends about your personal issues?

Never
Seldom
Sometimes
Often
Always

3) How often have your online friends offered you support when you had a real life problem?

Never
Seldom
Sometimes
Often
Always

4) How often do you make up stories and histories for your characters?

Never
Seldom
Sometimes
Often
Always

5) How often do you role-play your character?

Never
Seldom
Sometimes
Often
Always

6) How often do you play so you can avoid thinking about some of your real-life problems or worries?

Never
Seldom
Sometimes
Often
Always

7) How often do you play to relax from the day's work?

Never
Seldom
Sometimes
Often
Always

8) How often do you purposefully try to provoke or irritate other players?

Never
Seldom
Sometimes
Often
Always

In Their Own Words: Unique Components

There were a handful of responses that were unique and did not clearly fit into the components mentioned.

The Nurturance Motivation

There is a specific genre of Asian video games that focus on nurturance - raising a pet / plant / son / daughter. We seldom see that theme in Western games, but it’s clear that it’s a powerful motivator for players.

Making a Difference

Some of the narratives were incredibly intriguing because they express how MMORPGs are fulfilling an important function in the lives of people who play them. For example, the following narrative illustrates how the online environment provides a space where people who want to make a difference can do so.

====

The Search for Self

Others describe how virtual worlds in general are a tool in the search for the self.

The Search for Youth

And most intriguing of all, the following player articulates how the online environment provided a means to become young again.

In Their Own Words: The Immersion Component

Over the past 5 years, I have asked MMORPG players hundreds of different questions. The one that inevitably provides the most interesting responses is this one - “Why do you play?”. The following narratives show how multi-faceted every player is and how motivations intersect and influence each other. Together, these narratives provide the foundation to any other discourse about MMORPGs. After all, if we don’t understand why players are in these online worlds to begin with, then we can never truly appreciate the more complex phenomena that emerge from these environments.

Oftentimes, we project our motivations onto others and we fail to appreciate what “fun” is to someone else. The following narratives show how relative fun can be and the sheer diversity of ways of deriving satisfaction from the same construct. “Fun” means something different to different people.

The narratives are framed by the 3 main components, thereby illustrating how the different subcomponents can combine, but more importantly, shedding light on where more work still needs to be done. The presentation below extracts parts of long responses submitted by players and might create the illusion that players are more single-dimensional than they really are. This was done to make it easier to understand the spectrum of motivations. Most players in fact described their preferences along several motivations so make sure you browse through the profile tool to get a sense of how multi-faceted players really are.

At a Glance:

- My Story
- The Story of the World
- Quests
- Role-Playing
- Identity Exploration
- Exploring the World
- Secret Locations
- Discovery
- My Story
- Knowledge
- Fantasy
- Escapism

====

My Story

A prevalent theme among players who enjoy being immersed in a game centers on developing a back-story or history for their characters. For them, it is crucial that their character makes sense and is rooted in the lore and mythos of the world.

====

The Story of the World

It is also important to them to learn the story of why the state of the world is the way it is. They go out of their ways to read up on the histories of different key characters or races / tribes in order to learn the story of their world. A world that has a solid, sustained story is what allows them to do what they enjoy - creating characters that fit into and become part of the larger story.

====

Quests

Quests are an important way in which the story of the character can weave into the story of the world. This is because players find themselves invited to become a part of the history.

====

Role-Playing

A related motivation is social role-playing - sharing the story of your character with the stories of others in a structured way.

====

Identity Exploration

Oftentimes, identity exploration and role-playing are seen as the same thing, but they are in fact different phenomena with some overlap. Role-players are focused on stories and becoming a part of the world. Players who use the game as a tool for identity exploration are less concerned with stories and more interested in trying out different personality traits as a means of introspection.

====

Exploration

Many players derive satisfaction from exploring the world for the sake of exploring it. They enjoy adventuring in order to see the world.

====

Others commented that it wasn’t exploring in and of itself that was fun, but instead what was rewarding was finding out-of-the-way caves, dungeons or secret locations.

====

Discovery

We see the same notion of exploration and discovery in other players but focused on non-geographical elements of the game. For example, centered on quests, NPCs or obscure knowledge.

====

Knowledge

What becomes clear is that for some players, the accumulation of knowledge is in and of itself deeply rewarding.

Oftentimes, this knowledge acquisition is rewarding because it can be shared with others. It’s now about knowing something as much as being able to share that knowledge with others.

====

Fantasy

Immersion also refers to the more basic sense of “being somewhere else”, of being immersed in a compelling fantasy world.

====

Escapism

The flip side of fantasy immersion is escapism - a desire to leave a world behind together with its problems.

====

Who Needs Fantasy?

We conclude with players who feel that fantasy and immersion have no real impact on their enjoyment of a game.

In Their Own Words: The Social Component

Over the past 5 years, I have asked MMORPG players hundreds of different questions. The one that inevitably provides the most interesting responses is this one - “Why do you play?”. The following narratives show how multi-faceted every player is and how motivations intersect and influence each other. Together, these narratives provide the foundation to any other discourse about MMORPGs. After all, if we don’t understand why players are in these online worlds to begin with, then we can never truly appreciate the more complex phenomena that emerge from these environments.

Oftentimes, we project our motivations onto others and we fail to appreciate what “fun” is to someone else. The following narratives show how relative fun can be and the sheer diversity of ways of deriving satisfaction from the same construct. “Fun” means something different to different people.

The narratives are framed by the 3 main components, thereby illustrating how the different subcomponents can combine, but more importantly, shedding light on where more work still needs to be done. The presentation below extracts parts of long responses submitted by players and might create the illusion that players are more single-dimensional than they really are. This was done to make it easier to understand the spectrum of motivations. Most players in fact described their preferences along several motivations so make sure you browse through the profile tool to get a sense of how multi-faceted players really are.

At a Glance:

- The Ultimate Chat Room
- Socializing != Relationships
- Forming Relationships
- Romantic Relationships
- A Helping Hand
- Playing with RL Friends & Family
- The Guild
- Teamwork
- As Therapy or Outlet

====

The Ultimate Chat Room

Socializing in MMORPGs means different things to different people. For some, the fun lies in being able to log on to a world where there’s always someone to chat with.

====

There is an underlying tension that the following narrative foregrounds - that oftentimes the desire to chat with other people doesn’t translate into a desire to actually form significant relationships with other players.

====

Forming Relationships

Now contrast that thread with the following narratives that illustrate the desire to form personal relationships with other players.

====

A related theme are players who are open to developing a romantic relationship in these environments.

====

A Helping Hand

Altruism is highly correlated with socializing and forming relationships. Perhaps this is because helping someone else is the easiest way to meet someone new in the game and strike up a conversation. The more ways in which players can and are encouraged to help each other, the easier it is for players to meet each other.

====

Playing with RL Friends / Family

For others, socializing in the game means socializing with friends and family rather than meeting new people. The game becomes a way to keep in touch, collaborate, and learn about each other.

====

The Guild

It makes sense for players who enjoy socializing to be part of casual, friendly guilds because these groups provide a constant source of structured chatting and relationships.

In fact, stories of guild migrations show how the guild itself becomes a motivation for playing.

====

Teamwork

A related theme is the satisfaction derived from working and collaborating with others in a structured way. For some, the rush of a team victory is what keeps them coming back to the game.

====

As Therapy or Outlet

Several players described how these online environments provided social outlets that they do not have access to in real life. For them, MMORPGs served a much needed social function.

====

It’s Not About the Social Things

And before we leave this section on Social components, I want to include narratives from players who are largely not interested in socializing with others in the game.

In Their Own Words: The Achievement Component

Over the past 5 years, I have asked MMORPG players hundreds of different questions. The one that inevitably provides the most interesting responses is this one - “Why do you play?”. The following narratives show how multi-faceted every player is and how motivations intersect and influence each other. Together, these narratives provide the foundation to any other discourse about MMORPGs. After all, if we don’t understand why players are in these online worlds to begin with, then we can never truly appreciate the more complex phenomena that emerge from these environments.

Oftentimes, we project our motivations onto others and we fail to appreciate what “fun” is to someone else. The following narratives show how relative fun can be and the sheer diversity of ways of deriving satisfaction from the same construct. “Fun” means something different to different people.

The narratives are framed by the 3 main components, thereby illustrating how the different subcomponents can combine, but more importantly, shedding light on where more work still needs to be done. The presentation below extracts parts of long responses submitted by players and might create the illusion that players are more single-dimensional than they really are. This was done to make it easier to understand the spectrum of motivations. Most players in fact described their preferences along several motivations so make sure you browse through the profile tool to get a sense of how multi-faceted players really are.

At A Glance:

- Progress & Advancement
- The Seduction of Achievement
- The Grind
- Reaching the End Game
- Recognition & Competition
- Self-Sufficiency
- Optimization

====

While many players describe a desire to achieve in the game, there appear to be two different threads of where the satisfaction lies. One group of players derive satisfaction from the constant progress offered by the game mechanisms, while the other group of players are driven mainly to reach a goal (typically the end-game).

Progress / Advancement

====

The Seduction of Achievement

Other players elaborate on how achievement is structured differently in MMORPGs than from real life, and it is this difference that makes advancement seductive in MMORPGs.

====

The Grind

In fact, that sense of constant progress engineered by the behavioral conditioning of the game is so powerful that several players described the pleasure they derive from the grind.

====

Goal-Driven

Notice that in several narratives above players explicitly talk about never wanting to reach the end-game because they consciously realize it is the constant progress they enjoy. Now contrast that theme with the following narratives that describe the opposite desire.

====

Power brings Recognition

Now, while some players desire to reach the end-game for their own enjoyment, others want to reach the end-game for a slightly different goal.

This player describes an achievement motivation that interacts with the community. It’s not the case he wants to become powerful for its own sake, but he desires power because power is respected and recognized by others.

Competition

The Achievement components in one way or another are centered over the underlying theme of power and different ways of harnessing and deriving satisfaction from power. Players who enjoy advancement and progress for its own sake derive satisfaction from gaining power over time. Others enjoy power because it is respected. The following players enjoy the derivation of power that results from competing with other players.

====

Self-Sufficiency

For other players, power is desired because it allows for self-sufficiency. Power for these players is not sought for social recognition, but rather, because it grants independence.

====

Optimization

For many who choose this path of power, understanding the underlying game mechanics is crucial because power is derived from charts and rules, and thus knowing those rules becomes a form of power.

====

It’s Not About Achievement

Of course, there are also players who don’t find achievement fun, and some of these narratives are presented here.

Types vs. Components

While there are taxonomical differences between Bartle’s Type and the Components mentioned in this presentation (i.e., Socializing and Role-Playing are not highly-correlated), I would argue that there are more important underlying theoretical differences in terms of how the two models conceptualize player motivations. I describe these differences in detail here.

People Don’t Fit in Boxes

It only makes sense to have a Type called an Achiever if your population shows a bi-modal distribution of high Achievers and low Achievers. The following graph shows a hypothetical bi-modal distribution.

The problem is that bi-modal distributions seldom occur in personality, attitude or ability assessments. Almost all psychometric assessments follow a normal distribution (the bell curve). For example, the graph below is the histogram of the scores on the Achievement Component in the current data set of 3200 respondents. In other words, most people fall along the mean and there are few individuals who fall along the ends of the spectrum. It only makes sense to classify people into Types when there are clear distinctions in the distribution of the population. This is not the case with player motivations.

Note that Bartle’s model doesn’t propose an Achievement axis, but the same argument applies to the two underlying axes in his model. The 4 quadrants in his model only makes sense if most people do not all fall near the origin. Bartle’s model is a classification model. A player fits in 1 of 4 boxes. The Components model is an assessment model. Every player has a score on each of the components.

====

Motivations Do Not Suppress Each Other

Bartle argues that players have a primary motivation and typically fall clearly into one of the 4 Types. The 2 underlying axes of his model suggest that an Achiever cannot be a Socializer. More importantly, this assumes that motivations suppress each other. The more of an Achiever you are, the less of a Socializer (or Explorer or Killer) you can be.

If this were the case, then we would expect that the 3 main components (Achievement, Social and Immersion) to be highly negatively correlated. In other words, if you score high on Achievement, then you should score low on the Social component (and Immersion component). This is not the case. The 3 main components are largely uncorrelated (r’s ~ .10). The following scatterplot with the Achievement and Social components show that motivations are largely independent of each other rather than following an inverse pattern. Your score in Achievement has nothing to do with your score in the Social component.

====

It’s Configural

Bartle’s Types puts people in one of 4 boxes and argues that the other 3 boxes say nothing about you. The Components model says the opposite. Your scores on all the components matter. A player who scores high on Achievement and low on Socializing (solo grinder) is a very different kind of player from a player who scores high on Achievement and high on Socializing (raid guild officer) and the more you know about their scores, the more you know about their preferences.

More importantly, the Components model shows that low scores are just as interesting as high scores. When you score low on Socializing, it’s not the case we simply discard the Socializing component and say it doesn’t matter to you. Your low score on Socializing means you don’t like games that force you to interact with other people (i.e., dependencies in EQ - bindings, teleports, rezzes). In other words, low scores are just as revealing as high scores.

The key point is that the components are configural. People do not fall into simplistic Types. There are many different kinds of people with high scores on Achievement, and knowing what their other scores are is meaningful. In Bartle’s model, all Achievers are the same. In fact, this shortcoming in the Types model is why it became necessary for Bartle to create 4 additional Types (8 Types altogether) in his recent book in an attempt to cover those nuances. The problem is that subdivision is not the answer. People are never just one thing. The answer is not subdivision but understanding that people don’t fit into boxes. Motivations are configural. If it’s ok for me to like both ice-cream and French onion soup in real life at the same time, why can’t I be both an Achiever and Socializer in an MMORPG at the same time? Players can never be understood if they are assumed to be defined by a single preference. Players are multi-faceted and most people like and dislike many things at the same time. The core problem with the Types mode is that it says that people can only like one thing at a time.

====

Summary

Motivations Profile Browser

The Motivations Profile Browser is a tool that provides in-depth profiles of 127 MMORPG players who completed both the assessment and took the time to write about why they play. The motivation components of each player is shown visually next to their open-ended responses.

The tool allows you to either go through the profiles one by one, find a profile with an index, or randomly select a profile (default mode).

Access the Motivations Profile Browser

Here are several profiles that show how the tool works:

1) Socializer: Here is a typical profile showing a clear dominant motivation. In this case, it is the social component.

2) Social Role-Player: This profile shows how motivations do not suppress each other and in fact combine in interesting ways. This player enjoys the role-playing and customization aspects of the game within the context of socializing.

3) Solo Achieving Explorer: And here we have a player who loves advancement and the underlying mechanics and who prefers to solo. He also goes out of his way to explore the world.

Take the Motivations Assessment

The Motivations Assessment is a survey consisting of 39 multiple-choice questions. At the end of the assessment, your percentile ranks in the 10 motivation subcomponents against a sample of 3200 respondents are shown in several graphs. Information on how this assessment was developed can be found in this article.

Take the Motivations Assessment

Motivations: The Bigger Picture

A series of t-tests were used to explore gender differences while correlations were used to explore age differences and how motivation subcomponents might be related to hours of game play per week.
(Easier-to-interpret graphs on next page.)

====

Because standardized scores and effect sizes (based on continuous variables) are less-interpretable than percentages (based on categorical variables), a different way of understanding this data is presented here. The “primary motivation” for each player was inferred from their scores. A respondent was assigned a primary motivation if there was no close secondary motivation (primary * .75 > secondary). 57% of players were assigned a primary motivation based on this criteria. This is a somewhat lax criteria but serves the purpose of providing an easier interpretation of the data.

The results from the main components are presented first. Overall, 43% of players did not have a primary motivations using the above-stated criteria. Of those players who did, 20% had Achievement as their primary motivation, 20% had Immersion as their primary motivation, and 17% had the Social component as their primary motivation. The underlying gender and age differences are far more striking when presented using categorical data.

The primary subcomponent was inferred from the largest subcomponent score to preserve enough cases to show the data across the 10 subcomponents.

====

Male players tend to be more driven by the Achievement subcomponents than female players, while female players tend to be more driven by the relationship and customization subcomponents. Both male and female players are equally likely to be driven by the socializing, teamwork, discovery, role-playing and escapism subcomponents. Worth noting is that there is a gender difference in the relationship subcomponent but not in the socializing subcomponent although these two subcomponents may seem highly interconnected. In other words, male players socialize just as much as female players but are looking for very different things in those relationships.

Older players are most unlike younger players in the Achievement subcomponents for both male and female players. Younger players are more likely to be driven by advancement, competition and understanding the underlying mechanics. Older players and younger players are not significantly different in terms of the Socializing or Immersion subcomponents.

The best correlates with hours played per week were the advancement and mechanics subcomponents for male players, and the relationship component for female players. In other words, the reasons why men spend a lot of time in the game are different from the reasons why women spend a lot of time in the game. Men who spend a lot of time in the game are using that time to gain levels, get rare items and understand the game mechanics, whereas women who spend a lot of time in the game are using that time to build personal relationships.

The best predictors of hours played per week were explored using a multiple regression with gender, age and the 10 subcomponents as predictors. The model was significant at p < .001 with an adjusted R2 of .06 (not very good model, weak predictors). The best predictor was the advancement subcomponent (Beta = .13, p < .001) followed by the relationship subcomponent (Beta = .10, p < .001). However, none of the subcomponents turned out to be good predictors of hours played per week.

====

The best predictors of problematic usage were explored using a multiple regression with gender, age, hours per week and the 10 subcomponents as factors. A survey scale for problematic usage was developed using the following items (on a fully-labeled 5-point scale using construct-specific response options). These items are based on Ian Danforth’s work that teased apart the Engagement factor from the Addiction factor.

• Do you spend more time than you think you should playing the game?
• How difficult would it be for you to limit your playing time?
• How agitated do you get if the servers go down unexpectedly?
• How often do your friends or family members complain about your game play behavior?
• Has your work/school performance suffered because of your game play?
• How much of your happiness in life currently is derived from playing the game?
• Have your personal relationships suffered because of your game-play?

A principal components analysis revealed a single factor with an eigenvalue greater than 1 that accounted for 47% of the overall variance. All items loaded onto this factor with a factor loading between .52 and .79.

The multiple regression was significant at p < .001 with an adjusted R2 of .33 (a good model with strong predictors). The best predictor of problematic usage was the escapism subcomponent (Beta = .31, p < .001), followed by hours played per week (Beta = .27, p < .001) and then the advancement subcomponent (Beta = .18, p < .001).

The results of this multiple regression are interesting in that it shows the escapism subcomponent to be the best predictor of problematic usage. In other words, it is the players who use the online environment as an escape from RL problems that are most likely to develop problematic usage patterns. This is in contrast with claims that it is something inherent in online games that cause addiction and problematic usage. Now, the advancement subcomponent is also a good predictor but not as strong as the escapism subcomponent. The data show that the primary cause of problematic usage are pre-existing RL problems rather than something inherent to online games, and that the game mechanics (often claimed to be strongly addictive) are in fact weaker predictors of problematic usage than the state-of-mind of the player.

====

Respondents also answered (yes / no) whether they had:

- Been on a raid for at least 8 hours
- Ever used a third-party macro or app
- Bought a virtual item / currency
- Ever had an opposite gender character as their main

A series of logistic regressions were used to see which of the 10 subcomponents, in addition to gender and age, might be good predictors for the above 4 statements.

The best predictor for “8 hour raids” was the relationship subcomponent (B = .66, p < .001) followed by the teamwork subcomponent (B = .39, p < .001). While this may seem unintuitive, it does make sense that it is the people who are most interested in serious sustained relationships that would end up in raids of significant duration. And in fact, female players are more likely to have been in an 8 hour raid than male players (35% vs. 26%).

The best predictor for “3rd party macro” was the competition subcomponent (B = .28, p < .001) followed by the mechanics subcomponent (B = .22, p < .001). In other words, third party macros are a way for players to gain an edge over the competition and “optimize” their characters.

The best predictor for “bought virtual item” was age (B = .32, p < .001) followed by the relationship subcomponent (B = .28, p < .001). Age is a significant predictor because of disposable income, but I have no good explanation for why the relationship subcomponent would be a good predictor.

The best predictor for “gender-bending” was the role-playing subcomponent (B = .26, p < .001) followed by the customization subcomponent (B = .24, p < .001).

A Model of Player Motivations

Asking MMORPG players why they play reveals a dazzling array of varied motivations. Indeed, this wide variation illustrates why MMORPGs are so appealing - because they are able to attract people with very different motivations for playing.

Being able to articulate and build an empirical model of these underlying motivations provides an important foundation to several other avenues of research. First, it gives us a meaningful way to differentiate players from one another as well as allowing us to explore, for example, how older gamers are different from younger gamers. Second, a model of player motivations provides a tool to explore in-game preferences and behaviors. For example, which players are most likely to become guild leaders or which players are most likely to exhibit problematic usage?

====

Bartle’s theoretical model, while providing important insight, suffers from several limitations.

1) Proposed components of each Type may not be related. For example, Bartle proposes that role-playing and socialization both fall under the same Type, but they may not be highly-correlated.

2) Proposed Types may overlap with each other. For example, aren’t members of raid-oriented guilds both Achievers and Socializers? But in Bartle’s Types, they are on opposite corners of the model.

3) The purely theoretical model provides no means to assess players as to what Type they are. But more importantly, without resolving the problem in (1), any attempted assessment of players based on this model might be creating player types rather than measuring them.

In essence, it would be hard to use Bartle’s model on a practical basis unless it was validated with and grounded in empirical data. For example, Bartle suggested that different Player Types influenced each other in certain ways. But unless we have a way of assessing and identifying players of different Types, theories built on top of Bartle’s model are inherently unfalsifiable. While a “Bartle Test” (not made by Bartle) does exist, the dichotomous, forced-choice nature of that assessment tool merely perpetuates the assumptions of Bartle’s Types rather than validating them. In this article, I present a methodology used to validate Bartle’s model and how the results are similar and different from Bartle’s proposed model.

====

These motivations were then converted into survey questions, such as:

How important is it you to level up as fast as possible?

- Not Important At All
- Slightly Important
- Moderately Important
- Very Important
- Tremendously Important

The full list of questions used and information on administering the assessment tool is provided here.

Respondents then rated each statement on an online survey. In the current data set, 3200 respondents completed an inventory of 39 items. A factor analysis was then performed on this data to separate the statements into clusters where items within each cluster were as highly correlated as possible while clusters themselves were as uncorrelated as possible. This methodology achieved three goals:

1) Ensured that components of each motivation are indeed related.
2) Ensured that different motivations are indeed different.
3) Provided a way to assess these motivations.

I’d like to stress the iterative nature of this endeavor. The open-ended responses and brainstorming hint at the boundaries of the territory, tested by the factor analysis, at which point I return to open-ended responses to better explore the areas the factor analysis identified as coherent constructs. Respondent responses then inevitably shed light on nuances of motivations that I generate further statements to explore.

====

The descriptions below emphasize what it means to score high on the subcomponents. Scoring low on these subcomponents is just as revealing. For example, a player who scores low in the Socializing subcomponent would prefer game mechanics that don’t force them to interact with others (i.e., character dependencies in EQ - binds, teleports, rezzes). For the sake of brevity, the “flip side” of every subcomponent is not explicitly stated.

====

Advancement: Gamers who score high on this subcomponent derive satisfaction from reaching goals, leveling quickly and accumulating in-game resources such as gold. They enjoy making constant progress and gaining power in the forms offered by the game - combat prowess, social recognition, or financial/industrial superiority. Gamers who score high on this subcomponent are typically drawn to serious, hard-core guilds that can facilitate their advancement.

Mechanics: Gamers who score high on Mechanics derive satisfaction from analyzing and understanding the underlying numerical mechanics of the system. For example, they may be interested in calculating the precise damage difference between dual-wielding one-handed swords vs. using a two-handed sword, or figuring out the resolution order of dodges, misses, and evasions. Their goal in understanding the underlying system is typically to facilitate templating or optimizing a character that excels in a particular domain.

Competition: Gamers who score high on this subcomponent enjoy the rush and experience of competing with other gamers on the battlefield or economy. This includes both fair, constrained challenges - such as dueling or structured PvP/RvR, as well as unprovoked acts - such as scamming or griefing. Gamers who score high on this subcomponent enjoy the power of beating or dominating other players.

====

Socializing: Gamers who score high on this subcomponent enjoy meeting and getting to know other gamers. They like to chit-chat and gossip with other players as well as helping out others in general - whether these be less-experienced players or existing friends. Gamers who score high on this subcomponent are typically drawn to casual, friendly guilds.

Relationship: Gamers who score high on this subcomponent are looking to form sustained, meaningful relationships with others. They do not mind having personal and meaningful conversations with others that touch on RL issues or problems. They typically seek out close online friends when they need support and give support when others are dealing with RL crises or problems.

Teamwork: Gamers who score high on Teamwork enjoy working and collaborating with others. They would rather group than solo, and derive more satisfaction from group achievements than from individual achievements. Gamers who score low on this subcomponent prefer to solo and find it extremely important to be self-sufficient and not have to rely on other gamers. They typically group only when it is absolutely necessary.

====

Discovery: Players who score high on Discovery enjoy exploring the world and discovering locations, quests or artifacts that others may not know about. They enjoy traveling just to see different parts of the world as well as investigating physical locations (such as dungeons and caves). They enjoy collecting information, artifacts or trinkets that few others have.

Role-Playing: Players who score high on Role-Playing enjoy being immersed in a story through the eyes of a character that they designed. These players typically take time to read or understand the back-story of the world as well as taking time to create a history and story for their characters. Also, they enjoy role-playing their characters as a way of integrating their character into the larger ongoing story of the world.

Customization: Players who score high on this subcomponent enjoy customizing the appearance of their characters. It is very important to them that their character has a unique style or appearance. They like it when games offer a breadth of customization options and take time to make sure that their character has a coherent color scheme and style.

Escapism: Gamers who score high on Escapism use the environment as a place to relax or relieve their stress from the real world. These players may use the game as a way to avoid thinking about their RL problems or in general as a way to escape RL.

====

The subcomponents generated by the factor analysis are NOT player types. It is NOT the case that we have come up with 10 boxes that we can put players in, but rather, we have revealed 10 subcomponents that co-exist and together reveal the motivations of a player. Bartle assumed that your underlying motivations “suppressed” each other. In other words, the more of an Achiever you were, the less of a Socializer, Explorer and Killer you could be, but just because you like ice-cream doesn’t mean you will hate pasta. The assumption of polarized motivations is also not supported by the correlations of the current data set. The Achievement component is not negatively correlated with the Socializing component as Bartle’s model would predict. In fact, it is mildly positively correlated (r = .10, p < .001). A more detailed comparison between the Types vs. Components approach is presented in a separate article.

The factor analysis also revealed several important ways where the data differed from Bartle’s theoretical model:

1) Socializing and Role-Playing: Bartle proposed that people who like to chat and make friends are also the people who like to role-play. These are in fact two independent motivations.

2) Achieving and Competing: While Bartle proposed that Achievers and Griefers were separate Types, they are in fact fairly correlated with each other. The Advancement and Competition subcomponents are correlated at r = .41, p < .001.

3) The Explorer Type: Bartle construed Explorer’s as people who enjoyed both exploring the world, gathering information as well as enjoying tinkering with the underlying system and mechanics. These are also in fact two different kinds of people. My earlier attempts to find the Bartle Explorer failed until I tried to look for those two constructs separately. In other words, there is a Discovery subcomponent that revolves around finding and accumulating knowledge that is separate from the Mechanics subcomponent that is interested at unraveling and tinkering with the game mechanics.

4) Immersion: There is also a separate set of motivations that didn’t exist in Bartle’s Types. The Immersion subcomponents revolve around story-line, role-playing, fantasy, customization and escapism and are independent of the Socializing motivations.

====

In his book, Designing Virtual Worlds (2004), Bartle critiqued an earlier model of player motivations also derived from factor analyses. Here I present and respond to some of those critiques.

1) The motivations suggested by the survey are implicit in the questions. While that is true, the survey doesn’t implicitly presume a grouping of statements and that was the more important goal of the survey - to understand what statements did correlate to form a “subcomponent” rather than simply assuming such. For example, we found that socializing and role-playing are independent constructs.

2) Brainstorming motivations is as subjective as brainstorming player types. The important difference though is that the brainstormed motivations are then empirically tested to find validated constructs. The data showing discrepancies with Bartle’s original Types illustrate how player motivations can’t simply be brainstormed. They must be tested.

3) The labeling of the facets is not provided by the factor analysis. Nor are the labels of the Player Types inherent in any way. The Player Type labels suffer from the more serious problem of labeling a cluster of motivations that are not really correlated.

4) Some of the facets overlap, but some don’t. And the only way we can know this is by having a validated tool for assessment and then observing the underlying correlations. And in fact, the Player Types also overlap, but this was not apparent until we had a way of measuring those motivations. More importantly, the current model of 3 main components is largely uncorrelated with each other (all around r = .10).

====

Details of Factor Analysis

A principal components analysis was performed to arrive at a parsimonious representation of the associations among the 39 items. 10 factors were extracted with eigenvalues greater than 1. Together, these factors accounted for 60% of the overall variance. The chart below shows the factor loadings of the survey items used.

The scores for all subcomponents were generated for each of the 3200 respondents using a regression method. Another principal components was performed on the 10 subcomponent scores. 3 factors were extracted with eigenvalues greater than 1. Together, these 3 factors accounted for 54% of the overall variance. These 3 factors are largely uncorrelated (r’s ~ .10). The chart below shows the factor loadings of the subcomponents on the 3 main components.

Posted by nyee at 8:19 PM | Comments (13) | TrackBack

New Look. New Content. New Gadgets.

I'm glad I finally got around to reskinning the site. I hope you all like the new look. There's a lot of content in this issue - both quantitative and qualitative - and also some interactive pieces. It struck me particularly in this issue how it's fun to make research interactive - to provide ways for readers to engage with the data. I hope you find the motivations profile browser interesting.

As always, I really do appreciate those of you who participate in these surveys as well as those who help spread word of this project. Feel free to drop me a note here or email at contact@nickyee.com

How You Can Help:

- Post a message on your community forum or message board about the findings.
- Create a link to "The Daedalus Project": http://www.nickyee.com/daedalus/

As usual, your comments and feedback are most welcome. Any questions should be directed to contact@nickyee.com