i prefer achievements because i like the points better than gold/silver/bronze and the level system. plus i have many many more friends with live to compare them with.
If a game is good then I will replay it, it should not need achievements or trophies. "
Perhaps not, but they add extra incentive and encourage you to do things you might not bother with otherwise and to continue playing to achieve certain goals.If you don't like them, they're easy enough to ignore, but I think they've been a great addition to gaming and add much more than just bragging rights, as many seem to crisitize them for. "
If people enjoy them that fine but for me they add nothing. "
I agree with this dude. And with most games, I've normally had my fill with one play through. Nothing has the replayability of Baldur's gate 2 to me =( One can hope Dragonage does. "
And I agree with that. Baldurs gate 2 is the epitome of replayability in my mind. I do think the ps3's Trophy format is pretty cool, because if I work really hard on getting 100% on a game, I think it's cool that I get a little something special for it. Plus, it feels good getting that Platinum. It wouldn't be that hard for Microsoft to introduce a parallel to this if they wanted, though.
I don't have a PS3 (yet) but I plan on only getting exclusive games and playing everything else on my 360. I doubt I will ever play third party games on PS3.
I find em to be pointless. If I want to replay a game, it's gonna be because I enjoy playing the game, not because I want to do something stupid like defeat 5 bosses while naked and using a pistol. There's absolutely no incentive to getting them, they don't add anything. Well, they do add to your gamerscore. But the gamerscore doesn't do anything either. You can't buy anything on the marketplace with gamerscores or trophies. They're completely meaningless. And most of the achievements these days aren't even achievements. Like... completing a tutorial, that'll earn you some achievement. How is that an achievement? It isn't. There's nothing meaningful about completing the game's tutorial, you're supposed to do that. Or getting 10 headshots, that's something that's bound to happen if you play an FPS. But for some reason that'll also net you some achievement somewhere. It's idiotic. How about the achievement for completing the game? That's no achievement, you bought the damn thing... of course you should've completed the game.
I look at Achievements when I'm looking at someones profile and seeing what kind of games they like and see if we have any similar taste. The guy with hardcore Bioshock achievements, I know is going to like Bioshock, so I'll probably make a new friend. So I don't think they're totally meaningless/
I'd like to invest more into my trophies, but I just don't buy enough PS3 games. Anytime I have to choose between the 360 version of a game and the PS3 version of a game, I always pick the 360 version because of XBox Live AND for the achievement points. I don't think I have a single trophy...
" I definitely agree, I think Sony were too late in adding them and it came off as a little bit of a desperate attempt to keep up with Microsoft. I love achievements, because it tracks my progress as a gamer, it's great to be able to look back at everything I've accomplished on the 360.. I do like the RPG-esque leveling up system the trophies use, but the majority of my games don't even support trophies, so it doesn't really have the same affect, you can't really compare yourself against someone else when somebodies list of games may only include two or three that support trophies, to someones who has 5 or 6. The whole RPG element falls apart with that. I also like using achievements as a means to extend replayability in games, I'll usually look through the list and try and go for most of them, but with trophies, I just don't take any notice of them. "
Exactly, Sorny might as well not wasted their time. If it's not there from the start, then whatever is added on will be crap.
Some achievements, however, are ridiculous. I wish Softy would set some guidelines. Eg, if someone creates an achievement that says "Play the multiplayer game 1500 times" that someone should be Shot and/or Fired. Or the very least it should be rejected. No one wants to play a crap game in multiplayer 1500 times. Even people with No Lives have more Life than that!
Achievements. Not that I'm super hardcore into either system, but PS3 Trophies are so scattershot and late to the game that I can't really use them as a good measurement against others. They're not an accurate e-peen representation, you could say.
I started on PS3, and I like the different types of trophies better than different amounts of points. If I play a 360 game I try for the achievements, and I've finished a few PS3 games that didn't have a trophy patch, but it almost feels like wasting time, when I could be playing something to get more trophies. Playstation.com has improved their trophy connectivity, I hope that enables the Giant Bomb site to work with it, too. I don't understand why people are saying trophies seem tacked on, when they have the same requirements as achievements. And I think they're a better judge of where someone's at right now, since there are fewer games that support them, you actually have a chance of having most of the available trophies.
this, i dont' care to much for them. they are pretty much the same thing just one if on the 360 and the other one is on the ps3. the other thing is that if a multiplatform game they both have the same trophies and achievements.
Achievements. They seem more seamless with the game environment, probably because they were simply there first. And it is easier to check achievement and gamerscore than it is to check trophies and those levels that PS3 has.
In my experience, achievements have the ability to make 'bad' people out of good ones, also known as 'achievement whores'. You know, people who buy/rent the game for the sole purpose of completing it enough for as many points possible, virtually disregarding any of the real things that make a game a game. What a person does with their purchased property is their business, but, c'mon. The fact that there is a market for crappy games (for example, TMNT, or Cars) because of a few easy achievements is appalling.
@angelfan91: "ahem*
I don't really hear much about PS3 owners that do this, even though they are pretty much the same exact thing.. only achievements provide the reward of an addition to a cumulative gamerscore. And that's what makes it evil. >=(
..I don't have a PS3, so I can't really have an unbiased opinion.
i dont care about either in the sense that i TRY to get them, but easily achievements, if only because it adds up to one single number (the gamerscore)
It's all about the rare achievements for me, love the giantbomb achievement tracker, the overall number is utterly pointless and so is the trophy level, it's all about each achievement in itself.
Log in to comment