"Gaming Motivation" Topic

'Other' … Bringing History to Life … as mentioned in the pre-poll discussion but never included in the list. It is the primary motivation for most players I have grown up with and is not the same as e.g. 'simulation'.

Phil

"Other" becase it's a cumulative thing. All these aspects come together in the various games that I play. I enjoy it all!

Who gives a ?

Why do we keep having these pointless polls ?

Silly questions and simplistic answers.

All of course,
but I do aim at a nice presentation
where the terrain is on par with the
painted minis.

GildasFacit, the polls are not like death or taxes where you have to participate, just drive on by if they are not to your taste, or perhaps offer a 'deeper' poll.

I was going to offer a thoughtful answer, but instead, I will simply offer to GildasFacit that it isn't Be-a-Pecker day.

is that really a thing?

I guess that Fun is the main driver. If it wasn'f fun then it'd be work, and I don't get paid to game….

I thought it was horses butt day.

I feel that the storytelling aspect should be in the list of alternatives. What made me fall for miniature wargaming (as opposed to any other hobby where I can have fun and socialise just the same) was the thought of telling a story on the tabletop, and having that story made visual (in however imperfect a way) with miniature figures and a miniature landscape.

Still, though, I picked "Fun". I wouldn't be into this hobby if it wasn't fun and sociable.

Other-- all of the above.

I would say that yes, these polls are often pointless and sometimes downright silly but they foster interesting and lively discussion most of the time. I can't imagine why somebody would bother to come to the poll discussion area just to complain about the polls, though. Skip them if they bother you so much!

I picked 'fun' too, but that's definitely cumulative. A cool presentation, good story/mission, engaging in light competitiveness with friends…that's the synergy of a good gaming session. My only real concern with rules these days is they don't get in the way of the above.

Oh and no flatulent egotistic pouty power gamers either.

its a mix of all of them. Its never just one thing on the list.

Game mechanics are a factor in the sense I like some things and detest others.

I desire an element of fun – but if that was the sole factor there are board games…

Presentation – Yes, the look of the game is a reinforcing factor.

I do get most of my satisfaction in that I value games for their accuracy, either to the historical era they're set in or to the genre they're depicting.

Having gamed since the Kennedy administration, I chose fun. I cannot think of doing anything for that long if it wasn't fun.

Other, because it is a mix of all the answers provided, not just one. If I must 'pick one,' it is fun or I wouldn't be doing it.

Its all about the fun

I know I wouldn't sit down to even the best "historical simulation" if it was also no-fun at all. Which is why hardly anyone games the logistics chain anymore.

I said 'simulation' because even if I'm playing a fun and silly pulp game I want it to accurately reflect Pulp action with heroic derring-do, over the top action and the bad guys dieing by the truck load.

Well if we are going by Presidents to show our bona fides -- having gamed since the Diefenbaker era ( Eisenhower to you yanks) I game for all of the reasons provided It is a way to carry on a shared interest in history with friends through creative model making in a stimulating competitive environment and to have fun playing with toy soldiers

For historical games, it has to have a shred of reality. If a game doesn't pass that test, not going to play. Beyond that I values fun and presentation.

Fun will inevitably win this poll – because who doesn't want enjoyment out of their games?

The trouble is, 'fun' isn't really a design in feature … fun comes because you get some of the other genuine design features spot on (and so we all enjoy the game) … Games that try to be 'fun' usually aren't (I know … lets add loads more dice to the game – that'll be fun .. no it won't: unless it makes sense within the game it'll just be tedious and pointless) ..

So I think you have to look beyond the superficial fun to what makes the game entertaining …

Phil

I voted "fun" but its an all around answer for me. One of the problems with miniatures gaming is the so called 200 foot general syndrome. A lot of toil and ink have gone into reducing or eliminating this as well as adding "the fog of war" to games to attempt to model some modicum of reality, or plausibility in the case of fantasy genres, to the the games.

For me it comes down to making it more of a role plaing environment. Here's what I mean: I want to be the general poring over the maps, barking orders and riding into victory in the heat of battle. To the highest degree possible I want my games to model the tension and atmosphere of those events. Some may call that simulation, but I believe that a level of uncertainty adds to the experience, the thrill and "fun" of a game. Particularly after you've spent hours, days and weeks painting your minis and building the terrain.

Yeah, it's a little bit of all of them, but if you're asking me to pick one, it's fun, hands down. If it's not fun, then why am I there?