• 57 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Posted by Vampire_Chibi (147 posts) -

I don't know about you guys, but i've got over 50000 points on the xbox.

In the beginning it was quite the pleasure to get an achievement, the bleep bloop sound was really addicting, even better when it had alot of points and even more so if it was hard to get.

But now, i feel like in some games the points are just part of the ride and the hard achievements don't justify the points,

i remember when i played on the original xbox; in alot of games there were easter eggs or special items ingame that you could only get if you did this impossible task, that was also very satisfying, even if it didn't go from game to game or on my gamertag to show off or anything like that.

Right now i have this awesome pc, which i couldn't afford at all when i was little, i can play anything now, so why not pick games for this beast of a machine, so this lead to playing more games on pc, well i still play most with friends on xbox, since that somehow

always seemed easier. So as a pc gamer, i would ofcourse you steam. steam has achievements, but i don't care, i don't care about the achievements on steam, i don't know, they don't seem to hit me the way xbox did.

Well what about games without achievements? well i still play alot of RTS games and they don't have achievements, i mess around in g-mod with no care for the achievements, so why bother?

well its exciting when the achievements lead to a special place in the game, like some of the fallout 3 achievements, they weren't interesting in design but they pointed you to a specific place in the capital wasteland, there by helping you in the exploration of the world.

if anyone has played any LEGO game, they would surely have tried to get a 100%, which i had, that was actually fun, even if you could call it grinding, it was fun and when i found a hidden area and did something, a achievements was highly appreciated.

in some games, i would greatly appreciate if the achievement came with a weapon or something else unique, that could only be obtained through the achievement, like a hidden area or something like that.

All in all, i kinda wanna start over, but not with the same games, maybe when the next xbox comes out, i kinda would like if they made present and past achievement lists, so i wouldn't loose the progress but i could start new on a new system.

What do you guys think? does it even matter to you anymore? is it more important just to try to enjoy the game without expecting any easter eggs or secret unlocks?

or would you like a totally new system which handles your progress somehow?

speak your mind and lets discuss \(OuO )

#2 Posted by Terramagi (1159 posts) -

Steam needs a horrifically obnoxious sound to make their achievements "legit".

#3 Posted by Canteu (2814 posts) -

Achievements have always been obsolete.

#4 Posted by DeadVillager (77 posts) -

The Law of Headlines aside, I think that achievements still have their place in games. Some people appreciate achievements for the prestige, others for the challenge, and even more simply for the novelty. They can, as you said, be used to encourage players to do or find things they otherwise wouldn't, and they can also present a series of concrete steps or goals to help detail-oriented players navigate through the game. They can also act as a soft "hard-mode" for players who might otherwise find the game too easy, and end up attempting the suggested challenges that achievements present.

For this same reason I welcome games that keep a separate challenge system within the game as well as an out-of-game achievement structure, like Fallout: New Vegas for instance.

#5 Posted by A_Talking_Donkey (262 posts) -

I've never understood the appeal of achievements in the first place. It seems like a weird concept to intentionally put something in your game that suggests altering how you adjust your play outside of how you typically would do it anyway - and not even necessarily for the better.

#6 Posted by BrockNRolla (1702 posts) -

Some people feel hooked into a specific console because of their legacy of achievements. Even I, who would claim I don't care about them, often find myself choosing the 360 version of games because I know they'll add to my achievements. I certainly don't think they're obsolete.

#7 Posted by Demoskinos (13874 posts) -

I like them. I don't care what system they are on at first I was into "boosting" and that whole nonesense but after a while my luster died down. I'll go full tilt on games If I enjoy them enough. I just recently did all the achievements for Sleeping Dogs and it was fun.

#8 Posted by bemusedchunk (582 posts) -

Were they ever relevant?

#9 Posted by killr0y (114 posts) -

No. And I don't quite understand the point of this thread.

#10 Posted by Sooty (8082 posts) -

They are as pointless as ever.

#11 Posted by TheUnsavedHero (1255 posts) -

Sure they're pointless. Every time I unlock one though, It makes me turn to heroin.

#12 Posted by Seedofpower (3909 posts) -

@DonNoFace said:

The Law of Headlines aside, I think that achievements still have their place in games. Some people appreciate achievements for the prestige, others for the challenge, and even more simply for the novelty. They can, as you said, be used to encourage players to do or find things they otherwise wouldn't, and they can also present a series of concrete steps or goals to help detail-oriented players navigate through the game. They can also act as a soft "hard-mode" for players who might otherwise find the game too easy, and end up attempting the suggested challenges that achievements present.

For this same reason I welcome games that keep a separate challenge system within the game as well as an out-of-game achievement structure, like Fallout: New Vegas for instance.

Wow, I couldn't have said it better myself.

#13 Posted by Maginnovision (481 posts) -

Don't care about them and I never have. People seem to love them so they're not obsolete I guess.

#14 Posted by StrainedEyes (1310 posts) -

I like them.

#16 Posted by Dagbiker (6898 posts) -
#17 Posted by ajamafalous (11592 posts) -

I've never understood how anyone could hate achievements. They don't negatively impact your playing of the game in any way if you ignore them. 
 
 
Personally, I really enjoy going out of my way to get achievements that I wouldn't have necessarily gotten playing through the game normally. It's like the extra challenge that, in the past, would've been a dare from a friend, but today is instead a prompt from the developer with official recognition of it when you do succeed. Also, I haven't had my 360 plugged in in about two and a half years now (only Steam) and I don't really understand how or why people think Steam achievements somehow don't matter. Is it because they don't have a notification sound or an arbitrary point value associated with them?

#18 Posted by Freshbandito (611 posts) -

Are you gonna try and take my achievements off me!? You and what army!?

#19 Posted by Dixavd (1134 posts) -

They are a tool. Most aren't used well enough to actually add to the experience - but for the ones that are well designed, and for the potential there is to design around them, they can actually add quite a lot to the experience of the game and be used to nudge people into doing certain things and trying different options without just puttting in an in-game reward that people only find out about by word of mouth and look it up (ending up with them doing the action just for the reward - such as an Easter Egg or an item - and completely destroying the point of it in the first place to make them try new things: i.e. the destination becomes the focus rather than the journey to get there).

#20 Posted by geirr (2381 posts) -

@DonNoFace said:

The Law of Headlines aside, I think that achievements still have their place in games. Some people appreciate achievements for the prestige, others for the challenge, and even more simply for the novelty. They can, as you said, be used to encourage players to do or find things they otherwise wouldn't, and they can also present a series of concrete steps or goals to help detail-oriented players navigate through the game. They can also act as a soft "hard-mode" for players who might otherwise find the game too easy, and end up attempting the suggested challenges that achievements present.

For this same reason I welcome games that keep a separate challenge system within the game as well as an out-of-game achievement structure, like Fallout: New Vegas for instance.

What this dude says.

Personally I was never too interested in achievements and trophies but I always appreciated the little ding to pat me on the back to tell me I did something more or less good.

#21 Edited by Dad_Is_A_Zombie (1225 posts) -

For the most part I still enjoy pursuing achievements/trophies. Apparently that makes me a less sophisticated gamer in the eyes of the internet. Oh well...

#22 Posted by EpicSteve (6442 posts) -

I'm more weirded out at the proposition of achievements carrying over from the 360 to Durango. At some point the average score is going to be at 100K or higher. Then who the fuck is going to care about 5 point achievements. I don't want the system to die, but someone smart needs to figure out how to make them meaningful again. I've gotten a lot more mileage out of my games this generation thanks to achievements.

#23 Posted by ShiftyMagician (2128 posts) -

I believe only achievements that can be done by literally anyone are useless to me. I hate to break it to everyone, but beating the game in anything other than the hardest difficulty is not an achievement. Beating chapters in a game is not an achievement. Getting an arbitrary number of kills or getting enough of something is not an achievement so much as it is a test of your ability to stave off boredom from repetition.

Developers really need to make achievements in lower quantities and really make them hard so that if you ever do get one, you know you had to put some real effort to get them. Also it wouldn't hurt to tie achievements to actual in-game unlocks and rewards for doing them to give a sense of value for doing it as well. Just my personal thoughts on it.

#24 Posted by MideonNViscera (2257 posts) -

I'm personally over achievements after an entire gen of collecting them, but they're far from obsolete. They're actually pretty much mandatory now. Even a lot of my 3DS games have them, not to mention shitty iPhone games, Warcraft, etc.

Microsoft may want Kinect to be their big innovation this gen, but achievements had a much wider impact.

#25 Posted by emem (1955 posts) -

I never really cared about achievements and I'm glad I don't.  
 
Actually I decided to get the golden boy (Super Meat Boy) achievement when the game came out on Steam to see if it's doing anything for me to get hard to get achievements. But even though I felt quite good about what I had achieved I realised that it's just another timesink that's not even fun most of the time. Seeing something pop up while I'm just playing through a game is alright, using achievements mostly to prolong the gaming experience... not feeling it.

#26 Posted by SomeJerk (2971 posts) -

No more getting all achievements in a single playthrough even if it's a gamefaqs-less first run, please, game developers. Unless you're forced to retool all achievements days before release because Microsoft says so, of course. Give players a good reason to re-play., preferably by making a good game with newgame+, look at COD4MW1 for how it's done right for an FPS, and then give a reason to get achievements in a second, maybe third trip through.

#27 Posted by Hizang (8534 posts) -

I have always been into the Playstation cycle so even though I have had two 360's in the past years I never invested into there system. I go up and down with trophies, at points I hate them and at other points I love them. I mean their is a trophy to play through every song on the Rock Band Blitz pack, I would not have done that if that trophy wasn't their. But because of that I have heard a few songs for the first time that I have since put onto my iPhone, so you know, yay for trophies.

I think in the future you need to be able to do something with your trophies/points, something like every trophy you get is worth a penny and you can spend the money earned on a specific place in the PSN store. Even if it's as small as a new avatar or a new theme just anything.

#28 Posted by adam1808 (1214 posts) -

Were they ever not superfluous? Idle Thumbs had a great discussion on this a few weeks back.

#29 Posted by nintendoeats (5975 posts) -

They have their place, but if you want to play a variety of games you have to train yourself out of caring about them.

#30 Posted by forkboy (970 posts) -

@Dagbiker said:

The only S Rank I have is in the Walking Dead I have never cared.

Hah, ditto.

I'm not the sort of person who will go to 100% completion on anything, even games I thoroughly enjoy. I'm not going to hunt down 100 pigeons or whatever else you are asking me to do. But I still kind of enjoy getting them, if only to compare against my friends. I don't really care that my score is low, but I like to know if I've done more side stuff than Dan or whoever.

#32 Posted by forkboy (970 posts) -

@ShiftyMagician said:

I believe only achievements that can be done by literally anyone are useless to me. I hate to break it to everyone, but beating the game in anything other than the hardest difficulty is not an achievement. Beating chapters in a game is not an achievement. Getting an arbitrary number of kills or getting enough of something is not an achievement so much as it is a test of your ability to stave off boredom from repetition.

Developers really need to make achievements in lower quantities and really make them hard so that if you ever do get one, you know you had to put some real effort to get them. Also it wouldn't hurt to tie achievements to actual in-game unlocks and rewards for doing them to give a sense of value for doing it as well. Just my personal thoughts on it.

You realise it's absurd for developers to make these achievements just for the super-hardcore tiny minority, right?

#33 Posted by Eidderf (504 posts) -

I never get people complaining about how pointless achievements are, they are just some extra incentive to play a bit differently, challenge yourself or finish game when you would otherwise give up. Unless you are playing something educational or some sort of professional video game guy then the only point to playing games at all is for fun so looking into a feature and expecting much of it than that is kind of silly.

Personally I still quite enjoy them, some of the best mometns I had playing the Halo games were had trying to finish their more challenging achievements (like beat the final level with everyone on ghosts) so as long as developers keep them interesting I'll always give them a go.

#34 Posted by believer258 (11047 posts) -

I like them. Sometimes I'll go out of my way to get them. However, I don't really have a huge attachment to them.

#35 Posted by TarHeels2302 (16 posts) -

For me, it adds replay value to games that I really like. I would like to see the achievements for a game spread out in a way that would make you experience the best parts of a game. Something like Oblivion comes to mind, where you only get achievements for guild quests and main story quests. It would be nice to see them incorporate the many great side quests and hundreds of locations so that it would lead players to go off and discover more, which is some of the best times I had with the game. Adding rare in game items or gamer pics and avatar items would make achievement hunting that much better as well IMO.

#36 Posted by NoobSauceG7 (1210 posts) -

I like achievements and tink they are fun to get.

#37 Posted by JoeyRavn (4887 posts) -

I love Achievements.

#38 Posted by Salesmunn (75 posts) -

@Vampire_Chibi: Sony's Trophy system is much better. Instead of simply having a number that just goes higher and higher like Live, with PSN Trophies it gets more difficult to level up the higher in level you go just like a standard RPG. So a Platinum Trophy to a level 14 PSN player has less value than it does to a level 5 player. I love this, it keeps new players from feeling like they'll never have a chance of catching up to veterans.

I hope Microsoft moves to that system in the future because the never-ending Live score is a little boring.

#39 Posted by FlarePhoenix (420 posts) -

I think Achievements/Trophies can be good, but there aren't a lot of games that use them well. In my opinion, they should be given for things that a player can do, but probably won't. It's not a perfect example, but something like how people will play through Final Fantasy with only a team of White Mages.

The kinds I hate are ones you get for doing what you were already going to do (You completed the first chapter... have a gold star!), and online achievements. Online Achievements should not exist, in my opinion. They rely too much on finding people online who aren't dicks, are mostly achieved by getting a friend to let you get them, and become completely unobtainable once the servers shut down.

#40 Posted by Turambar (6485 posts) -

Nah, plenty of people still like them and play games for them. But they've also never ceased being a Bad Thing(TM).

#41 Posted by kgb0515 (411 posts) -

I think it depends on the quality of the achievement and the challenge behind earning one. It doesn't really mean anything if games throw the arbitrary "complete this level on any difficulty" achievement, but they are out there. I've never been a completionist though. I haven't really tried to get every possible achievement since Halo 3, so now they are just a pleasant surprise when they pop up. On the other hand, I can't seem to leave a new village in Just Cause 2 unless I 100% that biatch.

#42 Posted by kermoosh (911 posts) -

yeah i have around 47,000 points. i used to get everything and obsess over it. now i just get achievements as an extra activity in the game and after i've played the game thoroughly

#43 Posted by ShiftyMagician (2128 posts) -

@forkboy said:

@ShiftyMagician said:

I believe only achievements that can be done by literally anyone are useless to me. I hate to break it to everyone, but beating the game in anything other than the hardest difficulty is not an achievement. Beating chapters in a game is not an achievement. Getting an arbitrary number of kills or getting enough of something is not an achievement so much as it is a test of your ability to stave off boredom from repetition.

Developers really need to make achievements in lower quantities and really make them hard so that if you ever do get one, you know you had to put some real effort to get them. Also it wouldn't hurt to tie achievements to actual in-game unlocks and rewards for doing them to give a sense of value for doing it as well. Just my personal thoughts on it.

You realise it's absurd for developers to make these achievements just for the super-hardcore tiny minority, right?

Oh it is absurd hehehe. At least it would give achievements more actual value to the player when they actually achieve it. Besides the business and developer reasons for having easy achievements, if people really want the easier ones to continue existing, there needs to be a new method of valuing them so that when summarised into a singular score, the score better reflects the total level of achievement that someone has earned throughout playing many games.

One possible way to improve score-based achievements for example may be to implement some sort of dynamic tier system like how Giant Bomb kind of does it. Have the achievements be weighted from rare to common via unlock stats and alter the calculation of a user's achievement score based on all achievements achieved and differing multipliers, with rarer achievements getting higher multipliers of the allocated points than more common ones. If a rare achievement becomes more common, everyone's points are adjusted to reflect the reduced value of the achievement, encouraging people to hunt for rarer, more valuable achievements. There should probably be a small notification that is toggle-able if people don't want it, identifying if an achievement has lost its value due to reduced rarity. Basically it makes someone with a high achievement score all that much more brag-worthy, as high scores seen are more likely to have been achieved through getting a lot of hard-to-earn achievements whilst keeping the easier ones that people seem to want.

That's just a random idea I had about it because I loved the idea of achievements, but not the way they have been implemented at this time in today's platforms. Next-gen they should look into figuring out a novel way to give more accurate values to different achievements to counter all the easy ones that basically makes the whole idea of achievements pointless to the people who care (as well as make a better case for the people who don't care to potentially reconsider). I'm currently on the boat of people that don't care for the current implementations, but would happily jump back in if there's better ways to make them more appealing (more rewards either in-game or out of the game tied to achievements), as well as improve the integrity of their worth (especially for score-based ones like the 360 achievement system).

#44 Posted by NicksCorner (399 posts) -

I have never gotten into the achievements. Granted, I'm not very competitive in life and I have few gaming friends to compare to, but I have never S-ranked any game. Most of the achievements more seem like a chore.

#45 Posted by bemusedchunk (582 posts) -

@believer258 said:

I like them. Sometimes I'll go out of my way to get them. However, I don't really have a huge attachment to them.

This.

#46 Posted by laserbolts (5309 posts) -

Achievements are awesome and I think they are one of the best things to come out of this generation.

#47 Posted by thatdutchguy (1218 posts) -

Useless Threads : Have they become obsolete ?

#48 Posted by killr0y (114 posts) -

This thread is nothing but a bunch of people complaining that their scores suck.

Yes, its true: Everybody else looks at your score and laughs at you when you claim you're a real gamer.

#49 Posted by JasonR86 (9379 posts) -

ob·so·lete

    adjective /ˌäbsəˈlēt/

    1. No longer produced or used; out of date
      • - the disposal of old and obsolete machinery
      • - the phrase was obsolete after 1625
    2. (of a part or characteristic of an organism) Less developed than formerly or in a related species; rudimentary; vestigial

    verb /ˌäbsəˈlēt/
    obsoleted, past participle; obsoleted, past tense; obsoletes, 3rd person singular present; obsoleting, present participle

    1. Cause (a product or idea) to be or become obsolete by replacing it with something new
      • - we're trying to stimulate the business by obsoleting last year's designs

...so, no. Achievements are not 'obsolete'.

#50 Posted by Lysergica33 (480 posts) -

I never needed them before this generation, I don't need them now. They're nice though. I do get a little blip of satisfaction when I get a trophy on PS3. I had a period of being pretty into getting achievements for the sake of it when I had a 360, but as soon as I jumped ship after a couple of red rings, I stopped caring.