| Keirsey Temperament | Bartle Type | GNS Theory | Problem-Solving Style | Game example |
| Artisan | Killer | Experientialist | Power | GTA |
| Guardian | Achiever | Gamist | Persistence | Pokémon |
| Rational | Explorer | Simulationist | Perception | Half-life |
| Idealist | Socializer | Narrativist | Persuasion | WoW |
Jesus the hype is on, init? Not even a week.
I summoned this old table from an old blog post because well, it’s still pretty good. I could make a better matrix adding Myers-Briggs indicators but you get the point.
So Pokémon is all about the guardian type which is according to Keirsey’s:
As Concrete Cooperators, Guardians speak mostly of their duties and responsibilities, of what they can keep an eye on and take good care of, and they’re careful to obey the laws, follow the rules, and respect the rights of others.
Wikipedia’s definition:
Guardians are concrete and organized (scheduled). Seeking security and belonging, they are concerned with responsibility and duty. Their greatest strength is logistics. They excel at organizing, facilitating, checking, and supporting.
Duties of training your little monsters, responsibilities of the gym, hatching eggs etc. It’s a type of gameplay that works for some people! A lot of people. Tons of kids. Of course! The problem solving style for guardians –persistence- is the one that requires the less skills making this barrier of entry a non-issue.
Personally the guardian type of play looks exactly like what we do for work so I’m not attracted to that. But it doesn’t matter if you’re 39 and you find that type of challenge fun and engaging. Don’t tell me that it’s great because people go out though: if you need a small screen to look around so that you walk around, from any angle this sounds sad to me because self-sufficiency and resilience are precious but hey, whatever.
Games are a matter of taste as much as any other entertainment. We live in the tyranny of the majority though so people feel like they have to play the game. You don’t have to, it’s not that deep even though virtual worlds have real life consequences. Let’s see how it goes in 6 months.
What do I like? I am into rational type of play, how surprising.
As Abstract Utilitarians, Rationals speak mostly of what new problems intrigue them and what new solutions they envision, and always pragmatic, they act as efficiently as possible to achieve their objectives, ignoring arbitrary rules and conventions if need be.
Wikipedia’s:
Rationals are abstract and objective. Seeking mastery and self-control, they are concerned with their own knowledge and competence. Their greatest strength is strategy. They excel in any kind of logical investigation such as engineering, conceptualizing, theorizing, and coordinating.
This so me. I always feel kind of guilty ignoring arbitrary rules but I really dislike them. I think I like to disregard them so that I can make up my own mind. Games based on that temperament are kind of rare to come by on mobile. It’s too demanding, in many ways. All good, only playing computer games at home isn’t a bad thing.
A lot of people get lost in this rational temperament (the “what do I do now?” feeling in first person exploration games for instance).
To Each His Own.