I played the Android game "80 Days". It was well-written, but far too choose-your-own-adventure for my tastes. I don't like it when the way to win is not cleverness but blindly and exhaustively exploring the game tree. (I'm also far too impatient to enjoy travel.)
I will soon be tasked with writing a mobile adventure game and am worried that I can't recall ever liking one.
@peterdrake funny. I've recently come to appreciate that I'm exactly the opposite. For a good game, there are so many more ways to not "win" than there are to "win". Just winning bores me.
I always at least try to win in competitive games though: unless you've all agreed to just screw around, it's rude to not give it your best.
@2ck I'm not intensely competitive, but I want to have a goal. I don't like sandbox games and I don't like just clicking through a visual novel. My choices should matter.
I'm mostly an "Achiever" in Bartle's taxonomy. It sounds like your more of an "Explorer".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bartle_taxonomy_of_player_types
@peterdrake hmm. I don't much care for models like that which try to bin everyone. It's more interesting to consider things like that comparatively, somewhat like you did in saying I'm "*more* of an 'Explorer'" in relation to you, but maybe I'm more of a "killer" in relation to the next. The difference is the axes suggest a specific frame of reference and a zero point, but it's not obvious there is one--could someone be equally all four types?
@2ck Certainly! I imagine almost nobody is a pure exemplar of any of these categories. I enjoy socialization, competition, and even some degree of exploration.