No Online in Pikmin 3, But Yes to Wii U Achievements

@jillsandwich: Really? I think achievements are similar to laugh tracks in a sitcom. They make me feel like I need to be told that I am enjoying something.

@Nevi said:

I know Miyamoto has always expressed disdain for achievements, but I consider him to be one of the main progenitors in achievement-centric gaming behaviour. I spent a large amount of my childhood exhausting Nintendo's 1st party games with self-imposed challenges. Hack every single bush, bump every tree, bomb every wall and dig every spot of earth in Link's Awakening. Beat Super Mario Bros 3 in the fewest levels possible getting warp whistles. Do the same without warp whistles. Scan every single nook and crany of Super Metroid, shoot everything with every type of weapon. Beat rainbow road with koopa troopa and without releasing the acceleration.

You can say that there is no need for a formal achievement system to quantify this type of gaming. But the feeling I get from looking at my inventory in Link to the Past, with everything fully upgraded, all the bottles and every item, or from getting all those warp whistles, or from unlocking all those staff ghosts, that scratches the same itch that looking at a s-ranked/platinumed trophy list does for me.

Exactly, achievements are just a way to quantify those nice feelings of completion, or one-off tasks.

Deliver unto me some PIKMIN Nintendo, I don't care what you do to the periphery, just let me play another PIKMIN game

I still don't understand what people get from achievements. People be crazy.

While I agree with Miyamoto's philosophical stance on achievements, there are still times where their existence has lead me down roads I haven't been before. There are games that I've played the hell out of, only wanting more. Sometimes, such achievements might ask me to fight a boss without any weapons. I have to play differently. I could do it on my own time, but it's tedious, and at that point I'd rather move on elsewhere. Sometimes achievements can break up the tedium and give me a reason to come back to a game when I've exhausted all the "canon" activities. Still, I respect his stance.

Good. Maybe we won't get game recommendations based on how easy the achievements are, then. Never understood that business.

If they want to implement an achievements system then I feel not making them mandatory is perhaps a mistake. We'll have to see though I guess.

If your playing a game for the achievements why are you playing the game at all.

Figures lol. Oh, Nintendo.

So will it have local multiplayer?

"I want people to play because they enjoy playing and want to play more."

Achievements are a good incentive to make people play/enjoy your game more, since it gives the player a sense of being rewarded after fighting/overcoming a bitch fuckin'/asshole hard (Yes, that's an Alex Navarro reference) bossfight/difficult section of the game.

Nintendo's indifference towards achievements is worrying. I know, they want to be unconventional, but sometimes it isn't at all bad to go with flow a bit. It might spark a smidgeon of sympathy from MS/Sony fanboys.

Oh nintendo when will you use all that fucking wii money made from soccer moms and old people to buy some god damn fucking network and IT experts to build you a god damn universal network code engine like everybody else.

im sure you can make a deal like you did with the CDI and let some company with network tech make a crap zelda game for it in a trade. Besides zelda has sucked balls since it left the NES and SNES and that dumb ass Eiji Aonuma started his tingle and crap puzzles with it anyway nobody will notice it.

Never was a fan of Pikmin to be totally honest.

Good luck to all you Wii U enthusiasts... you're gonna need it!

"I'm not a big fan of using the carrots to motivate people to play," said Miyamoto back in 2009. "I want people to play because they enjoy playing and want to play more."

You know, I hate to pick on the guy. He makes cute, clever games, and he seems like a charming, adorable man, but statements like this make me feel the same way I do whenever a politician makes a statement that makes them seem like an out-of-touch dinosaur. I respect Miyamoto's opinion, but people don't want to just play solely for the enjoyment anymore. People like achievements, generally speaking. When games don't have them, many people get disappointed. This is similar to when Iwata dismissed online multiplayer. (That happened, right?)

Like I said, God bless Shiggy, but this quote just annoys me.

He's not actually wrong about the network requirements Pikmin would have you know. Peer-to-peer network replication is largely based on prediction; The sort of split second group behavior Pikmin exhibits during something like a boss fight would be pretty hard to write good net code for. As in really effin hard. Multiply that by shitty network connections.

I want a good reason to buy the wiiU and i hope they do deliver, i still believe they can, i mean c'mon it's Nintendo! Be nice to have a decent new console.

So Nintendo still don't get online and you should make achievements mandatory

The issue of 'not all games will have achievements' is one which I think is neither good nor bad.

On the one hand, achievements are a nifty little side thing which can give you an incentive to try out new stuff which you would have otherwise ignored (weapons, vehicles, etc), which can make you aware of sidequests you may have missed, and which can just be fun to collect for the sake of additional satisfaction.

However, that being said, achievements also often act as a 'free pass' for developers to be lazy. While achievements can be tied into side content, they are far-too-frequently used as a timesink to make players go back through something they've already done 'but faster' or 'with this weapon you didn't have the first time' or 'without taking damage' or any number of other things which add little to the game and aren't very fun to actually do. At other times, developers just don't care and will simply tie all the points into finishing the game or, worse, a bad game will come out which people will still buy because 'it has easy achievements'.

Basically, achievements can be useful and fun, but they can just as easily be a tool to keep players tied to a game long after the game runs out of actual content. I also agree with Shaanyboi concerning the 'collectible little' in Nintendo games (especially Galaxy 2's second set of stars); most of this stuff reeks of lazy achievements and I'd say that actually turning it into achievements would just make it that much harder for a person to put down the controller and say 'I'm not playing this because I'm not having fun'.

@jasondesante said:

Miyamoto fundamentally disagrees with something that makes no sense. Good for him for being smart. Now if only everyone else didn't insist everyone copies everyone else maybe uniqueness can be noticed. People say gaming is a more powerful art form than anything else, but it also needs to grow up. Letting something speak for itself isn't the way gaming journalism works anymore, its all about being as prejudice as possible up until it is released, then stop paying attention to it once it comes out.

Perfect example, Patrick talked about Kid Icarus a lot before it came out, but then never played it.

I've always hated achievements on a fundamental level and I agree with what you've said, but I think it's a smart decision for Nintendo to include them for the people that do want achievements. I find it very disheartening that Nintendo hasn't included any sort of online component in Pikmin. It's far from a deal breaker to me, I will still play it, but I just feel that the decision to forsake online co-op might send the wrong messages about their new consoles capabilities.

@Sharpless said:

"I'm not a big fan of using the carrots to motivate people to play," said Miyamoto back in 2009. "I want people to play because they enjoy playing and want to play more."

You know, I hate to pick on the guy. He makes cute, clever games, and he seems like a charming, adorable man, but statements like this make me feel the same way I do whenever a politician makes a statement that makes them seem like an out-of-touch dinosaur. I respect Miyamoto's opinion, but people don't want to just play solely for the enjoyment anymore. People like achievements, generally speaking. When games don't have them, many people get disappointed. This is similar to when Iwata dismissed online multiplayer. (That happened, right?)

Like I said, God bless Shiggy, but this quote just annoys me.

But he's absolutely right. I mean, I guess I have no problem with achievements, but I don't play games to get achievements, I play games to play games. The game should be good enough that some extra text on screen and a number doesn't take precedent.

@WickedFather said:

@Roodog said:

Yawn,

Achievements are lame.

I'm sad that Nintendo have succumbed to the crap that are achievements. Roll up pointless collectable litter.

...And their isn't collectible litter in Nintendo games already? Finding 100 Skulltulas, or almost 100 heart pieces? Or 242 stars in Mario Galaxy 2? The stuff is already there. It's just a matter of using it to keep a record so other people can see that you managed to 100% Galaxy 2, or got full health in a Zelda or whatever. And it's not like shitty Assassin's Creed achievements with flags, or Alan Wake with its thurmoses where it literally is just achievement bait. Stuff like hearts, or stars or whatever have a direct impact on gameplay. Just now, hey there's a record that you did it.

@Hizang said:

If your playing a game for the achievements why are you playing the game at all.

Achievements are a goal. Beating the game is a goal. People like goals.

Don't add achievements if it's not mandatory for every game. Stop taking half measures

Multiplayer that is shoe horned in to a single player game is so rarely compelling or even average, I'm not upset at all that Pikmin 3 won't have it.

Not surprised, but damn, after they have been making online RTS's for years... this seems like kind of a sad excuse.

Multiplayer in Pikmin 2 was amazing. I played it for hours with my friends. Warring your Pikmin against their's was always hilarious and a ton of fun. I hope they include local multiplayer but I can understand why they wouldn't include online. 
 
At this point I just want more Pikmin. I will be buying a Wii U specifically for it.

I agree about the achievements, why have them? People should play because they want to not because they want imaginary points or trophies.

@Zippedbinders said:

@Sharpless said:

"I'm not a big fan of using the carrots to motivate people to play," said Miyamoto back in 2009. "I want people to play because they enjoy playing and want to play more."

You know, I hate to pick on the guy. He makes cute, clever games, and he seems like a charming, adorable man, but statements like this make me feel the same way I do whenever a politician makes a statement that makes them seem like an out-of-touch dinosaur. I respect Miyamoto's opinion, but people don't want to just play solely for the enjoyment anymore. People like achievements, generally speaking. When games don't have them, many people get disappointed. This is similar to when Iwata dismissed online multiplayer. (That happened, right?)

Like I said, God bless Shiggy, but this quote just annoys me.

But he's absolutely right. I mean, I guess I have no problem with achievements, but I don't play games to get achievements, I play games to play games. The game should be good enough that some extra text on screen and a number doesn't take precedent.

I'm not saying achievements should be the sole basis for playing a game, but they can encourage people to forge ahead in a game they might have otherwise given up on or to, perhaps, play a game in a different way than usual. For example, the achievements for playing through Half-Life 2's Ravenholm using only the gravity gun or the entirety of Episode One firing only one bullet. They're two of the most satisfying, enjoyable experiences I've ever had, and there's no way in hell I would've ever thought to play them that way without the achievements being there.

And, if a game is really, genuinely bad, achievements aren't likely to make a difference to anyone except the truly insane. I really wanted to finish the first Assassin's Creed, both for the achievements and to see the story, but I found the game so frustratingly terrible and tedious that I gave up and never went back to it.

Achievements can be much more than just carrots on sticks to make people play a game. At their best, they can challenge and enhance a gameplay experience, and to write them off completely is a foolish mistake on Miyamoto's part. Perhaps Nintendo's not making them mandatory will weed out the lazy achievement makers and raise the likelihood of achievements being more worthwhile.

I dislike it when developers use the excuse "It's difficult to sync up over the internet" as a reason to not attempt at all. I whole-heartedly agree that multiplayer should not be released with horrible lag/balance/etc issues, and every game doesn't necessarily need it, but I dont see why Multi cant be added to the game in a later update after careful crafting. Sega said that VF4 wouldnt have online because lag compromised what made fighting games special. SF and many games since have proven that wrong and VF is stuck in the past, they even tried to add online after it was too late. Nintendo dismissed multiplayer for much of Gamecube's life cycle for much of the same reasons. I traded my GC for a PS2 and had a blast playing Battlefield 2: Modern Combat online for years. I personally think Pikmin online could've been tons of fun but hey life goes on lol, just another missed opportunity.

Worst of both worlds!

@WickedFather said:

@Shaanyboi said:

@WickedFather said:

@Roodog said:

Yawn,

Achievements are lame.

I'm sad that Nintendo have succumbed to the crap that are achievements. Roll up pointless collectable litter.

...And their isn't collectible litter in Nintendo games already? Finding 100 Skulltulas, or almost 100 heart pieces? Or 242 stars in Mario Galaxy 2? The stuff is already there. It's just a matter of using it to keep a record so other people can see that you managed to 100% Galaxy 2, or got full health in a Zelda or whatever. And it's not like shitty Assassin's Creed achievements with flags, or Alan Wake with its thurmoses where it literally is just achievement bait. Stuff like hearts, or stars or whatever have a direct impact on gameplay. Just now, hey there's a record that you did it.

But that's exactly what it's going to encourage, pointless collect quests added for the sake of it that have no rewards apart from achievements. I didn't think I'd have to expand on that.

Who is it encouraging? Again, Nintendo already has that mass-collectathon nature to their games (hundred-percenting Metroid etc), and yet they still manage to make those aspects of the game matter. And for those third party developers who are just going to be porting stuff over, they'll be just using the same achievements as they do on other systems, good ones and bad ones, so nothing changes.

And it's not like inherently achievement systems are bad. In alot of cases, they can expose depth in a game, or encourage you to better your own ability to play (hence achievements). Whether it be "do this crazy technique in a fighting game", then suddenly the player is AWARE that technique exists and needs to learn how to perform it, and maybe change their playstyle as to take advantage of it. You could say "complete this 150cc cup in Mario Kart without using an item," and suddenly you're having to learn to drive better, and perhaps learn to play more defensively without an item to save you. Hell, Smash Bros. is FILLED with them too.

There are good achievements and bad achievements. Mindless collectathon stuff with NO gameplay benefit, or generic "you beat this level" achievements are the bad ones. Just saying "they're all terrible" is really fucking ignorant.

Who is it encouraging?

And it's not like inherently achievement systems are bad.

Just saying "they're all terrible" is really fucking ignorant.

@WickedFather said:

@Shaanyboi said:

Who is it encouraging?

Developers.

@Shaanyboi said:

And it's not like
inherently achievement systems are bad.

Ones that give you pointless points and create any potential at all for encouraging play that is either tedious or unfun means the system is flawed and bad, and that's what they do. You can say just ignore them but a lot of people can't. If you can't see that you're really fucking ignorant.

@Shaanyboi said:

Just saying "they're all
terrible" is really fucking ignorant.

U mad bro?

It's encouraging developers who have already been making games for almost several years with achievements integrated in? Wow. Big fucking shocker. Stop it before it's too late.

Because there developers who can't think up good achievements for their game? That's your argument? So if I find first person shooters like Call of Duty tedious and unfun, should we just tell everyone to stop making first-person games? You hear that Bioshock: Infinite and Dishonored? You should probably go fuck yourselves because apparently if another developer does something poorly, it never should exist again.

Monster Hunter Tri worked perfect online, and that game had around 30 dinosaurs walking around in one game and was on the wii, if the new system can't handle that I guess they didn't take the trouble to improve the netcode.

@Shaanyboi said:

It's encouraging developers who have already been making games for almost several years with achievements integrated in? Wow. Big fucking shocker. Stop it before it's too late.

Because there developers who can't think up good achievements for their game? That's your argument? So if I find first person shooters like Call of Duty tedious and unfun, should we just tell everyone to stop making first-person games? You hear that Bioshock: Infinite and Dishonored? You should probably go fuck yourselves because apparently if another developer does something poorly, it never should exist again.

Your argument makes no sense. Nintendo said they will have an achievement system, it just won't be mandatory. Therefore, Nintendo can make games as it always has (and may or may not assign achievements to things like 100%) and the 3rd parties can keep doing exactly what they've been doing and adding shitty Thermoses that do nothing in the game but add tedious playtime.

Literally nothing will change for you, achievement-wise on the system. The only problem with not making them mandatory is that some games won't have them, so you won't be able to "show them off". The people that use achievements creatively or properly will still use them, the ones that use them shittily will still use them, and the people that make games that don't see the need for achievements won't force them in haphazardly. The only negative influence this decision will have is on your e-peen. And if you really give a shit about your "friends" seeing your Gamerscore, sort out your priorities, because it's a meaningless fucking number. I have a Gamerscore of like 56,000 on Xbox, and it's more embarrassing to me than a point of pride.