Jump to content
IGNORED

Achievements And Gamerpoints.


Blue
 Share

Recommended Posts

Absolutley no better, or worse.

I would have still done it, the fact that a little messge pops up to tell me I have done it make not a jot of difference. I reckon.

I think it makes a bit of difference, in the way that you get an extra reward for doing something cool. And on a subconcious level, a reward will always make you feel better about yourself. So I think in an absolute sense, it would be better. I think you could even show that in a scientific experiment. (Which would be quite interesting in fact).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Achievements don't have a bearing on whether I buy a console — I have all three now anyway — but I'll admit that it does affect purchase decisions for multi-platform titles. For instance, I knew I was going to buy GTA4 on the 360 even before the exclusive DLC was announced as I'm hoping Rockstar will really put some effort into thinking outside the box vis-á-vis Achievements.

Like many in this thread have already said, overall Gamerscore doesn't really interest me. However, if I really like a game then I tend to try and chalk up the full 1000 for it even if I end up giving up in the end — the Transmissionary and 7-day Survivor Achievements for Dead Rising will most likely always be out of reach to me.

Personally I think they're a great device to get people playing, it's just a shame that a lot of the time the possibilities are squandered. I think that obvious Achievements certainly have their place — completing Halo 3 on Legendary or Call of Duty on Veteran, for instance — but I wish some of the staid "Kill 100 enemies using _____" awards could be replaced with things like Goemetry Wars' Pacifist, or Shadowrun's virtual STD, Shadowrun Fever.

I used to collect Pogs during my playground days, and in some ways Achievements are a similar kind of deal — my perfectionism compels me. I just wish developers spent more time in making my compulsive journey a more adventurous one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the OP's feeling may be similar to the feeling I used-to-get trying to play 'normal' games when I was WoW-hooked (or AO, EQ or whatever)...

The fact you play for some time and have NOTHING to show for it (outside of that game) wheras, in that time, you just might have gained some rep, gold or even a level

I don't have a 360 so can't speak for achievements etc. - and certainly some seem to have been thought-up by fucking idiots - but a well-thought-out system which offers some progression from every game you play/gets you more value from playing them - is good by me.

I often hesistate from replaying games because I've "done it before" and "there are more games in the sea" - but if there was reward to be had, I'd probably buy fewer games.

Oh... wait...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love them, especially in games where they're done well. There seem to be 4 sorts:

1. Ones given for playing the game as it's supposed to be played.

2. Ones given for doing something that you wouldn't normally do in the game.

3. Ones given for doing something difficult in the game.

4. Ones given as payment for doing something the developers want you to do.

The (1) variety are weak as they suggest playing the game isn't reward enough in itself - Prince of Persia is the worst for this where most of the awards are for finishing levels. The (2) sort (survival in geometry wars, collecting dogtags in Gears) are my favourite encouraging you to explore the game a little more, and to generally play around. And (3) are good too - encouraging you to get good at the game. I don't really like (4) - a lot of the GHII rewards are like this: watch the credits, or buy all the gizmos in the shop.

I've been quite surprised by how much the achievements mean to me: I'm not usually a completist when I play, but the permanence of the achievements makes them much more desirable. I don't really care about my gamerscore though, nor would I play games I don't like (eg Hexic) even though there are some cheap achievements to be had.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the "Achievement unlocked" notice, but that's probably it.

On the other hand, I'm still trying to complete Survival on Prince of Persia because that's the last achievement I have to do, so it has some effect on how I play games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love em. I don't chase them (mainly because I'm generally not very good at games or just can't be bothered to chase them) but it's wonderful getting the little 'bok' sound and then having a look what I did to get it. And yeah, when I play my other consoles I feel a bit disappointed when I realise I won't be getting the 'bok' noise.

I will say this though; online ranked achievements can fuck right off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like them. I don't buy games soley for getting easy achievements or the like, but the games I do own I tend to play a lot more trying to get certain ones open. I guess thats just the perfectionist in me.

I only want one achievement which I can't see me ever getting, and its the Kick The Bucket one for completing Jordan on Expert, in Guitar Hero 2. :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love them, especially in games where they're done well. There seem to be 4 sorts:

1. Ones given for playing the game as it's supposed to be played.

2. Ones given for doing something that you wouldn't normally do in the game

The (1) variety are weak as they suggest playing the game isn't reward enough in itself - Prince of Persia is the worst for this where most of the awards are for finishing levels. The (2) sort (survival in geometry wars, collecting dogtags in Gears) are my favourite encouraging you to explore the game a little more, and to generally play around.

So you are saying that you should have nothing to show for playing the game properly, but get them for doing often irrelevant tasks that have no real purpose? I really can't agree with that at all. Granted some like the Pacifist achivement in GW are inventive and really make you work at them, but the dog tags on the other hand offer no real value or purpose.

The problem is that the achivements need to suit the game, not how you play the game. Spending hours doing irrelevant tasks to get 50 points isn't a worthwhile use of my time. Rewarding me 30 or whatever points for showing progress is a much better allocation of points, and then add the irrelevant "bonus" points on their own instead of being the bulk. By all means put in achivements to extend the game, but not to the point of forcing you to spend more time doing pointless tasks then on the main game. Oblivion had it right. 300-400 points for the main quest and then dividing the rest up amongst the guilds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will say this though; online ranked achievements can fuck right off.

I agree as far as ranked matches go (player match if it suits the game, yes), but the games that do this are aiming for the hardcore market, who will only ever play ranked matches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think they can ever be seen as a bad thing as if you don't like them you can ignore them, or even disable the notifications. But for all those that like completing set goals if they seem fun (what else do we all play games for?) they just add extra content to a game, increasing it's longevity. I don't think anyone could actively dislike them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think they can ever be seen as a bad thing as if you don't like them you can ignore them, or even disable the notifications. But for all those that like completing set goals if they seem fun (what else do we all play games for?) they just add extra content to a game, increasing it's longevity. I don't think anyone could actively dislike them.

you touch on a good point there - it allows developers to put in some goals without extra interface work, which is a great thing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really enjoying it actually, and yes, I'll buy 360 versions over anything else for achievements too.

When GH3 comes out, it'll be 360 so I can get lots and lots of achievements for it!

Never would have thought to play a game through multiple times, but I am with Gears of War.

Whats sad is i've a my box since launch and only managed 4500 ish!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love em. I don't chase them (mainly because I'm generally not very good at games or just can't be bothered to chase them) but it's wonderful getting the little 'bok' sound and then having a look what I did to get it. And yeah, when I play my other consoles I feel a bit disappointed when I realise I won't be getting the 'bok' noise.

I will say this though; online ranked achievements can fuck right off.

this

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As someone who quite enjoys achievements I have to say, when I first got my 360 I didn't really used to seek them out so much as, just play as normal and get a few random points dotted into my play.

That just got a little addictive for a while, and I've only collected the amount I have because of a year spent working in a games shop that meant I had a shop full of free games to try out.

And even then that's a lot less to do with achievements and more to do with the fact that because they were there, I was trying out games (and enjoying new series) that I would never have touched on other similar consoles. That can only be a good thing really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Games are all about achieving things, whether they're logged to a global system or not. While I enjoy Crackdown's vast array of extra-curricular activities, I would like them just as much if they were an integral component of the game.

So yes, you're mad if you dismiss other games for "not having achievements"; and as for gamerscores, they are meaningless showboating.

So you are saying that you should have nothing to show for playing the game properly, but get them for doing often irrelevant tasks that have no real purpose? I really can't agree with that at all. Granted some like the Pacifist achivement in GW are inventive and really make you work at them, but the dog tags on the other hand offer no real value or purpose.

There is no "value" or "purpose" to achievements anyway. The idea is to do something fun or challenging, and having something to tell you what to do is a good way to structure that.

Of course, if the task it sets you is tedious and not fun, then obviously you shouldn't bother.

Really enjoying it actually, and yes, I'll buy 360 versions over anything else for achievements too.

When GH3 comes out, it'll be 360 so I can get lots and lots of achievements for it!

Never would have thought to play a game through multiple times, but I am with Gears of War.

Whats sad is i've a my box since launch and only managed 4500 ish!

There's no reason why Activision can't put whatever achievements they include in GH3-360 into the PS2 version. I hope they do; they were pretty cool in the last one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose another question is, if its all rather pointless - if there was an option to turn achievements off your account, would anyone here remove them ?

Or, similarly if you're not a fan of achievements, do you actively try not to get any ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used to pretend I didn't like achievements but I absolutely love 'em! They add so much replay value to some games. I doubt I'd want to complete Gears again on a higher difficulty if it wasn't for the achievements.

They act as a reward. Completing a level on Tomb Raider may take an age, but when you get a box pop-up confirming you've passed the level and been given 50 pts it makes it feel as if you're getting something back for all the time and effort spent on the game.

I quite like how achievements were implemented in Virtua Tennis. You are rewarded not only for how good you are, but for the time you put into the game as some achievements are only unlocked once you have played enough games to unlock them.

I enjoy looking at my achievements on-line and comparing myself to how my friends are doing and to be honest I wouldn't want it any other way. Achievements are a valuable part of the 360 package and anything that keeps me playing for longer and makes me enjoy gaming once again can only be a good thing in my book.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They act as a reward. Completing a level on Tomb Raider may take an age, but when you get a box pop-up confirming you've passed the level and been given 50 pts it makes it feel as if you're getting something back for all the time and effort spent on the game.

Other than, you know, actually enjoying playing it?

A baffling stance that makes me think people don't actually like playing games. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Other than, you know, actually enjoying playing it?

A baffling stance that makes me think people don't actually like playing games. :D

Yes, I enjoy playing it, but it's nice to get a 'reward' at the end. I've played Motorstorm for hours on end on my PS3 and I have nothing really to show for all my hours and hours of hard graft!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But you wouldn't play Gears on harder difficulty if it wasn't for the Achievements? Why not, would you not enjoy it?

Well I've clocked it on the normal difficulty setting and the temptation of going through it again and racking up some more points appeals to me. Playing through it again without the points wouldn't be as much fun as I won't have anything to keep drawing me back (it's not like the story can do that as it's wank).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But you wouldn't play Gears on harder difficulty if it wasn't for the Achievements? Why not, would you not enjoy it?

I probably wouldn't have played it through on the harder difficulty if it wasn't for the achievements, same with a few others like RS: Vegas and Hitman etc.

I'm glad I have though, they're much more rewarding at that level, I used to just walk through most games at a medium difficulty, playing higher is usually more fun and extends the life of the game, especially if you're playing through it twice after getting to grips with it on a lower setting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I probably wouldn't have played it through on the harder difficulty if it wasn't for the achievements, same with a few others like RS: Vegas and Hitman etc.

I'm glad I have though, they're much more rewarding at that level, I used to just walk through most games at a medium difficulty, playing higher is usually more fun and extends the life of the game, especially if you're playing through it twice after getting to grips with it on a lower setting.

This is why I like achievements. They encourage me to do things that hopefully turn out to be fun anyway. For example, I enjoyed winning 100 ranked games online in PES; I would never have attempted that without the initial encouragement that the achievement offered. Achievements really enhanced Crackdown and made it, for me, a fuller experience than if I'd just been killing the bosses and randomly messing about a bit.

Your actual Gamerscore, though, doesn't really mean anything. I have about 28k and it's far more a reflection of the sheer amount of time I've put into the 360 since launch (and the number of different games that I've played) than any measure of skill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.