Should games be rated by the Bartle Test?

[omicron1]

The Bartle Test [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bartle_Test] is the best-known of a series of tests/theories for classifying players of MMORPGs/MUDs according to their interests: Achievers seek reward and completion; explorers enjoy discovery and immersion; socializers enjoy companionship; and killers seek challenge and victory.
Two somewhat-obvious things just occurred to me concerning this system: First, that gamers in general can be ranked according to these four classes (it's not just limited to MMORPG playing!); and second, that games can be ranked thereby, eliminating a good deal of the ambiguity present in subjective game scores. A game that is unusually high in achievement value may be a 6/10 to the mainstream press, but an achiever may consider it an 8/10 or 9/10 - for him.

So how do we harness this? My thought is, build a Metacritic-style rating site where every user takes a Bartle/similar test, which is used to give their user scores context. So if almost all Explorer users disliked Modern Warfare 3, an Explorer user would see a "For You: 2/10" rating; while in contrast, a Killer/Socializer would see a 9/10 or 10/10. We could even have an ESRB-like organization that rates games based on the weighted opinions of a panel of professional reviewers, then pastes those ratings on the side of the box!

I'm going to go out on a (very long) limb here and say that this system could, at last, get game ratings mostly right. Thoughts?

 

[Zantos]

It's an interesting theory, and would probably be a lot better than the current rating system. Yeah, I like it.

 

[Northern64]

I will agree with the premise that a Bartle test presents a more intimate way of conveying the rating of a game, but posting the revised rating on the box will become biased far to quickly because the people who rate the game for the box are going to be people who like that type of game. basically it would end up being "got 9/10 for achievers" and that would be it, there would be no other score because all the other scores would be to low to publish. now we are back to a basic game type differentiation that we already have.

the idea of using it for online ratings is a nice idea though. if all members of the community took the test as part of joining then you could search for reviews that match up with your personality without the whole checking past reviews and seeing how they match and comparing gripes they had with gripe you had on a game you already have... yaddy yaddy yadda

TL;DR online part great, box part not

 

[agentorange98]

Well I think it'd be good to rank those games within that context maybe but doing so only really deals with certain elements of the game, like what about a game's story and visuals which of the 4 deals with that? What if the game includes no online play, what role does the "socializer" class play there. Also it doesn't seem like a good choice for ESRB ratings as those work more around actual game content, like depending on visual style any game can get an M rating and does deserve it (Imagine if the Sims was set entirely in a series of Sex dungeons and S&M clubs but the goal was still the same)

 

[omicron1]

I will agree with the premise that a Bartle test presents a more intimate way of conveying the rating of a game, but posting the revised rating on the box will become biased far to quickly because the people who rate the game for the box are going to be people who like that type of game. basically it would end up being "got 9/10 for achievers" and that would be it, there would be no other score because all the other scores would be to low to publish. now we are back to a basic game type differentiation that we already have.

the idea of using it for online ratings is a nice idea though. if all members of the community took the test as part of joining then you could search for reviews that match up with your personality without the whole checking past reviews and seeing how they match and comparing gripes they had with gripe you had on a game you already have... yaddy yaddy yadda

TL;DR online part great, box part not

That's why an ESRB-like rating group would be necessary. Say, ten people per game from the full spectrum of interests. Each plays it, each gives their own (independent) rating; composite score is put on box. Scores wouldn't be "90% E"; they'd be similar to the current 4-letter interpretation of Bartle results: "EAsk" where Exploration is the highest interest, Achievement the second highest, etc. Maybe with a bar graph of relative values. No absolute scoring.

 

[Sixcess]

(Imagine if the Sims was set entirely in a series of Sex dungeons and S&M clubs but the goal was still the same)

I don't have to imagine it. I've been in Second Life.

 

[agentorange98]

(Imagine if the Sims was set entirely in a series of Sex dungeons and S&M clubs but the goal was still the same)

I don't have to imagine it. I've been in Second Life.

As the Red Baron would say Ka-Boom! http://www.the-gutters.com/comic/215-david-namisato

 

[Caffiene]

Really interesting idea...

It would be hard to figure out good, useful categories, though. The original Bartle test is extremely old, and even Bartle himself no longer considers it necessarily a good representation. Hes put out a number of papers with different variations, and changes his mind every few years.

If you use his newer ideas it becomes unweildy (for example, he adds an extra axis, giving 8 different major classifications)

Would certainly be interesting to do, though. Just a matter of figuring out the best actual categories to list.

 

[AngleWyrm]

This guy did an even better system: http://www.nickyee.com/daedalus/motivations.pdf

It breaks down motivations into Achievement (Advancement, Mechanics & Competition), Social (Socializing, Relationship & Teamwork) and Immersion (Discovery, Role play, Customization & Escapism). With this system, it's not so important how many points a game gets overall, but more important that it is focused on a target audience.

For instance, Skyrim might get 5/5 for satisfying the need for Advancement, with it's level-up skill system and specializations tech tree, but only 3/5 for Mechanics with a crafting system that gives almost no benefit but a skill system that shapes your character to your play style, and 2/5 for Competition with AI opponents that offer little to no threat. So it gets an Achievement score of 10/15.

In the same way, it receives a low score for Social components: (Socializing 2/5 for immense voiced AI dialog, Relationship 2/5 for joinable factions, and Teamwork 2/5 for AI companion) for a mere 6/15 Social score.

And finally, it gets high marks for Immersion: (Discovery 5/5 for a huge world full of things to find, Role play 3/5 for opportunities to choose which way to play out your character, Customization 4/5 for toon customizing, and Escapism 4/5 for the many stories to occupy your time) Total Immersion score 16/20