[Ydahs]

Trophies are the ultimate fetch quest.

I don't care about them nor go out of my way to get them, but I can understand why some people enjoy collecting them.

[vall03]

while I don't care about trophies, I noticed it affects my playing style. Whenever I played Zelda before, I didn't mind not getting all collectible items and such but when I played Uncharted, seeing that theres a trophy associated for getting treasures, it bugs me a lot that I might have missed one.

[Eusis]

I have a friend who refuses to buy any game, or even use a game on his PS3, unless he intends to get all the trophies. It has prevented him from playing numerous enjoyable games that I know he'd otherwise like, because his entire gaming focus is now centred around an arbitrary profile score and not on the game content itself. He has a problem, and it makes me sad.

This is the primary reason I want them gone, honestly. A little extra incentive to try a challenge or mix up your playing style? Neat. Something you start pursuing to the detriment of your own entertainment? Ummm. Something you hinge your purchasing decisions on and will not play a game because it either lacks them or has hard to attain ones? Ok, this is starting to look like one of the worst features introduced to video games ever. That's not even touching how there was (at least for awhile) a service where you bought points for your GamerScore.

On a personal level though, I'm largely ambivalent. If I can reasonably unlock it, neat. If it's going to be too much trouble, I just don't care, as a result I've only maxed out ONE game (Eversion HD), though I came awfully close in Lost Odyssey. I do hate the concept of a uniform feature like this extending to all my games however, especially with Xbox and Steam offering kind of clunky ways to disable it and Sony none whatsoever. Oh, and that Sony kind of sloppily crammed it in doesn't help, both Xbox Live and Steam smoothly integrated it but on the PS3 it's kind of obnoxious.

[ZeroCoin]

However, Naughty Dog's work on Uncharted and Uncharted 2 was nice to see, as they coupled the trophy system with old school in-game cheats, rewards and unlocks. Completing a trophy worked towards unlocking content I could play and watch, and thus they were made worthwhile. Sad to see them ruin that with Uncharted 3.

This. There are some excellent trophy / achievement implementations that extend the game in meaningful ways beyond an arbitrary meta-game. Mass effect did a similar system where different achievements improved your characters passive abilities.

Even with all that being said, they are completely optional. You can choose to ignore them if you don't like them or see any point in them. Personally I like earning achievements and it really extends how long I will play a game.

[Crewnh]

Sometimes they're bad, sometimes they're good. I really was gunning for the Uncharted 2 Platinum, not because of the platinum itself but because I wanted to play as Marco Polo in the multiplayer, and you have to get it to play as him.

[EatChildren]

Mass Effect 1 achievements were the only ones I ever actively tried to obtain, since they unlocked bonuses.

Hey yeah, that too. See, I quite like this, as it's not so much the thrill of getting an achievement, but ticking a box that unlocks something or contributes towards the game itself. It harkens back to the old days of entering cheat codes and unlocking random crap in games by completing challenges. If more developers did this I'd be more inclined to work towards achievements/trophies.

Though to be fair, I'm also quite fond of the achievements Valve include in Team Fortress 2, mostly because they cleverly teach you how to make good use of new weapons and items.

This is the primary reason I want them gone, honestly. A little extra incentive to try a challenge or mix up your playing style? Neat. Something you start pursuing to the detriment of your own entertainment? Ummm. Something you hinge your purchasing decisions on and will not play a game because it either lacks them or has hard to attain ones? Ok, this is starting to look like one of the worst features introduced to video games ever. That's not even touching how there was (at least for awhile) a service where you bought points for your GamerScore.

He downloaded some game trial, demo or something that added the game's trophy list to his profile, and had them locked as he didn't own the full game. He was legitimately considering buying and grinding through the game to get them all, or making a completely new profile, simply because he didn't want his profile 'tarnished' by these locked trophies. Thankfully he did neither, and learned to live with it.

It took me months upon months of narking to get him to buy Vanquish, because from first impressions he was sure he wouldn't bother getting all the trophies, but thankfully the demo broke him.

I mean, you can say it about everything, that psychological addiction to these kinds of score/levelling systems is dangerous. In theory it's no different to someone being addicted to World of Warcraft, obsessed with levelling up their character. But I cant help but feel sad that there are some gamers out there who, when thinking about a game they want to buy, have thoughts that first go to how many achievements/trophies they'll unlock. If people want to get them because they enjoy them, then fine, but when they become the very reason they game, and the priority reason for playing a game, then I think that person has an issue.

AN ISSUE I DON'T AGREE WITH.

[GraveRobberX]

There are two types of achievements I take issue with: 2) those that encourage you to play the game in a certain way, rather than the way you what to play. A good example of this is in Deus Ex with the don't kill anyone achievement. What if I want to kill people, why should I be punished for not playing the game in the way I want to?

You know how difficult it was to play on hard, kill no one and get all the trophies stacked
It made the game more exhilarating, yes you could go kill all the enemies, but when you went "Oh Shit!, 2 guards, how on earth do I bypass them", then you see a coke machine, luckily have praxis points and move it, to see a vent and guess what?, stealth as a fox, felt more awesome then shooting the 2 or double meleeing them 4TW!

I got all trophies in one playthrough, I was meticulous (only had to reload last save point 3 more times for the last 3 ending, Platinum Get!)

[Anteater]

I do know people that care about this kind of stuff so much that it ruins everything for them or see no point in playing video games without them, it's kind of weird, one friend tells me "what's the point of playing this or trying that? It doesn't have trophies", then there's one that was so bothered by Bayonetta's ranking system and he would keep restarting that same level and tell me he hates it because he keeps getting a low ranking (not trophy/achievement related, but I guess similar), so he stopped playing completely, a person could probably blast through the game multiple times with the time he spent just restarting that one level alone.

[Derrick01]

Why do you need achievements to foster creativity? Just be imaginative yourself, like back in the day before this stuff came along.

Because I would rather be rewarded for doing something creative and fun than for playing through the story which I was already going to do. There's no effort involved in just playing through campaigns today.

[Eusis]

Oh, it's being ruined in Uncharted 3? That I think is the other half of why I'd be happy to just see them disappear, for awhile it looked like they'd be integrated smartly into the game itself, allowing you to actually EARN stuff for getting them. But ME2 seemed to (mostly) phase that out, and if Uncharted 3 dumps that (or worse) then there's not much remorse to seeing them disappear as they become a largely detached metagame whose presence vanishing changes nothing in the games themselves.

[Bodom78]

I generally look over them before firing up a game to see which I might go for and which I will not bother with.

They have hurt some of my gaming experiences in the past, with my obsessive compulsive side getting the better of me I sometimes find myself grinding for hours or crossing off collectables on a map for no reward other then the achievement itself.

On the flip side, some got me to try different things in the game I would not have done or thought of in the past.

I don't think the should be removed. While most are an afterthought, on occasion you can find some really creative ones that can benefit a game.

And again, their optional and I'm pretty sure you can turn off the notifications on the 360.

[F#A#Oo]

I have a friend who refuses to buy any game, or even use a game on his PS3, unless he intends to get all the trophies. It has prevented him from playing numerous enjoyable games that I know he'd otherwise like, because his entire gaming focus is now centred around an arbitrary profile score and not on the game content itself. He has a problem, and it makes me sad.

I suffer from this...though occasionally and it's merely related to Wii-ware, PSN and Xbox live stuff...

Actual box copies I buy regardless...

[Grecco]

There are two types of achievements I take issue with: 1) those that require other people to obtain, so all forms of multiplayer-based achievements should go. I don't want to have to rely on other people. Other people are unreliable. 2) those that encourage you to play the game in a certain way, rather than the way you what to play. A good example of this is in Deus Ex with the don't kill anyone achievement. What if I want to kill people, why should I be punished for not playing the game in the way I want to?

Its not punishing you for playing however you want. More like rewarding you for playing it in a much harder way.



Anyways only real frustrating achievement other than online ones was in Halo ODST for killing the flying blobby things. You get an achievement for not killing them.

[The Technomancer]

There are two types of achievements I take issue with: 1) those that require other people to obtain, so all forms of multiplayer-based achievements should go. I don't want to have to rely on other people. Other people are unreliable. 2) those that encourage you to play the game in a certain way, rather than the way you what to play. A good example of this is in Deus Ex with the don't kill anyone achievement. What if I want to kill people, why should I be punished for not playing the game in the way I want to?

Er...thats why they're optional?

[Lyphen]

Good achievements make a great game better (some of the ones in Halo Anniversary seem like a fun diversion).

I don't care about them if either the game or the goals are sub par, or they're tied to multiplayer. Couldn't give two shits about TF2's achievements, and that isn't just because Steam Community is a poorly executed system.

[sublimit]

I pity the OCD gamers of this generation.

[ElectricBanquet]

I think this article is really overstating how hard it is to just ignore achievements. Either that or I'm just the exception. I have achievement notifications turned off, I don't know or care what my gamerscore is, and I rarely even look at the achievement list on my first playthrough of a game (I'll give it a look for subsequent playthroughs). I don't hate them and I'll specifically go for a certain achievement sometimes, but goals that I set for myself in a game have always been more compelling to me than goals set by the developer.

So, no I don't think there's some kind of problem with achievements. If the author if this article is letting achievements get in the way of his enjoyment of games then I think that's more his fault than Microsoft's.

[Eusis]

And again, the optional and I'm pretty sure you can turn off the notifications on the 360.

Problem is you disable ALL notifications. I also think I still heard the ding in Oblivion when I had them off (and forgot about it), but if you want to know whether or not you got a message from a friend you have to put up with it. Same with Steam I believe, it's either have the Steam overlay or nothing at all, but that's probably more likely to put in an option to disable achievement announcements specifically if enough people speak up.

[vodka-bull]

Have you ever got halfway through a game and then suddenly lost interest after realising all of the achievements are flipping impossible? I'm looking at you, Blue Dragon.

And that's, for me personally, another prime example of why we should keep achievements.

Back in 2008, I played Blue Dragon, earned 10G and left it unplayed in my shelf. But since I only got 10G I realised in 2010 that there's still a lot to do for me in the game. So I replayed it and I tried to get all 1000G (which I accomplished) and after I had all 1000G I realised that I would've never played it again if it wasn't just for the achievements. And I would've missed out of one of the best JRPG games in recent history, it was fun to get all the achievements, it was fun to play through the entire game without playing anything else for about 2 weeks. Yes, I worked with checklists to not have to play through the game again, but that didn't hurt my enjoyment with the game.

Same thing happened to GTA4. In 2011, I finally decided that I want to have all singleplayer achievements unlocked, and so I hunted all pidgeons, made every monster stunt and did all activities with my friends, and I have to admit that I would've definitely missed something if there were no achievements to collect.

And, as long as there's only one guy left on the planet who buys games just for the achievements, Microsoft Sony and Steam won't do shit to remove them.

[Rickenslacker]

I despise them in multiplayer scenarios, because they alter player motivations depending on what it's asking for, leading to a deteriorated experience for everyone else.

I also don't like that seemingly most games have a collectathon in them now solely for the purpose of an achievement.

[Sinthetic]

I'm in 2 minds really, I used to be a huge trophy whore, I got Platinum trophies on games that I didn't want to play and played till I couldn't stand a game anymore.

Now I don't give a damn about them at all and if they pop up, I don't even look to see what it was for... So I couldn't care less if they got rid of them. However, having some kind of task list to complete and a percentage progress tracker on some games is a good thing. I played Kirby Mass Attack and got 100% and it felt amazing.

It's sad when you begin to feel gaming is a chore just because you need to get those final few achievements that take 50 hours to get and you'd rather be playing a game that you actually have fun playing.

[JaseC]

Since then we've seen the PS3 and plenty of PC platforms like Steam introduce their own variations, but nothing else has been quite as compulsive. Anyone who's tried all three will agree: There's nothing quite as strong as the draw to become a Gamerscore whore.

I've tried all 3 and I care for none. I play games to experience the game, not breed the sense of accomplishment. Having said that, if an achievement adds an idiosyncratic element to the game without altering the core experience, I take no issue with attempting it; for example, the Little Rocket Man achievement in Episode Two.

[Noisepurge]

I have played through Dead Space using only the Plasma Cutter because there was a trophy available on it. I loved the game and i was glad the game gave me a challenge for the second playthrough.

There is another trophy for completing it on the hardest difficulty but i'm not interested in that. So in my experience, trophies can be really good for a game too. I probably wouldn't have challenged myself to just use the Cutter if the trophy wasn't available.

[Meisadragon]

Yes they do. Definitely. Once you get addicted to them, you tend to ignore good games which doesn't have Ach/Trophies. It's created so that you keep on buying games for a specific platform, and the funny thing is that, it totally works.

[L0st Id3ntity]

It's sad

/thread

[Zeliard]

This is the primary reason I want them gone, honestly. A little extra incentive to try a challenge or mix up your playing style? Neat. Something you start pursuing to the detriment of your own entertainment? Ummm. Something you hinge your purchasing decisions on and will not play a game because it either lacks them or has hard to attain ones? Ok, this is starting to look like one of the worst features introduced to video games ever. That's not even touching how there was (at least for awhile) a service where you bought points for your GamerScore.

Let's not forget the people who purposefully buy/rent and play through an otherwise poor game just for the easy achievements and nothing else. :P

Hey yeah, that too. See, I quite like this, as it's not so much the thrill of getting an achievement, but ticking a box that unlocks something or contributes towards the game itself. It harkens back to the old days of entering cheat codes and unlocking random crap in games by completing challenges. If more developers did this I'd be more inclined to work towards achievements/trophies. Though to be fair, I'm also quite fond of the achievements Valve include in Team Fortress 2, mostly because they cleverly teach you how to make good use of new weapons and items.

This is why I'm fine with Uncharted/Ratchet & Clank types of unlockables. When the PS3 got trophies some of the unlockables in Uncharted 1 and R&C: ToD were just turned into trophies, but they still held their original value of actually unlocking stuff in the game instead of increasing some arbitrary score.

Because I would rather be rewarded for doing something creative and fun than for playing through the story which I was already going to do. There's no effort involved in just playing through campaigns today.

Isn't the act of coming up with it and pulling something off its own reward? Is it really that meaningful to get some achievement message and sound effect and some gamescore points? I'll never understand it. Reminds me of this exchange I had in the Arkham City thread with a guy who wondered if beating it on Hard came with an achievement:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost...postcount=3705

[Android18a]

I prefer in-game achievements that have a use, than the pointless bragging type.

Xenoblade does it well, with each achievement bringing EXP to help your party along.

[vodka-bull]

And another thing I want to add: usually, I don't change my way of playing a game because of the achievements. On the first playthrough I just play the game until I'm finished with it and after I've seen the credits I might take a look at the achievements to consider whether or not I want to collect some more. Sometimes I also turn off the notifications on the Xbox dashboard to not get interrupted by a pop-up I don't care about in a game that has a really deep atmosphere (like Gears of War 3 for instance).

[X26]

I'm not a fan of how arbitrary it all is, but as long as the game doesn't have MP ones that fuck up the experience as a result I don't really care

[hioh631]

I don't see how achievements hurt anyone. They are only an issue if you personally make them an issue. Me I just play games and if I get trophies/achievements along the way then cool.

[vodka-bull]

I have a friend who refuses to buy any game, or even use a game on his PS3, unless he intends to get all the trophies. It has prevented him from playing numerous enjoyable games that I know he'd otherwise like, because his entire gaming focus is now centred around an arbitrary profile score and not on the game content itself. He has a problem, and it makes me sad.

Have you told him that he can make a 2nd profile on his PS3?

[catfish]

Get rid of any tied to online multi-player.

make this man in charge of things.

I enjoy them a lot. it gives me some extra stuff to do if I sort of want to play through the game again. I generally only go for ones I think sound fun though. 100% can suck it.

[flyinpiranha]

I think this is where I differ in opinion from most. When a game like ME has something happen that affects the game AND you get an Achievement for it, I see those as separate things. Much like games of yesteryear had these types of things already, just now there is a little notification to let your friends know you have it.

It would be like if Nintendo added them to their system, getting all the hearts in Zelda gives you more health, you would get an Achievement ... it's not like the notification that shows others what you have done is why you got the health, it's because you collected all the hearts, it's just now there is something that lets others know you did that.

I also think having them in Multiplayer is perfectly fine, along with peripherals, or anything else that the game thinks it might have. The point is to get people to step outside their normal play habits and try for something. Like speedruns or high scores in older games.

I assume those people complaining about them maxed out every high score of every game they played? All it is a high score. When I played Mario I didn't give a shit about the score but others did, it didn't affect my game. Same with 90% of adventure games that for some reason had a score.

What about GTA's percentage completion? I don't see the difference with this stuff. It's all optional. 100% wasn't needed to enjoy, complete, and love GTA.

[CrankyJay]

Get rid of any tied to online multi-player.

/thread

[2&2]

I despise them in multiplayer scenarios, because they alter player motivations depending on what it's asking for, leading to a deteriorated experience for everyone else.

This exactly.

and again, remember before achievements how we used to be able to download and share gamesaves?

I thought about buying RE4 HD, but I played through it on the PS2, and I don't have time to re-do all that unlocking work. I'd love to be able to play through the game leisurely for nostalgia, essentially picking up where I left off with all my unlocks. Can't do that. One less purchase. Sorry Capcom. Blame MS/Sony.

Also there's stuff, levels, unlocks I'll never see because I don't have the time anymore. Can't download a save so it collects dust or gets sold.

Until the systems have some universal option of disabling all achievement earning to be able to use another save, the system sucks.

[Takuan]

They don't bother me one iota. I don't go out of my way to get them, but it's amusing to get one doing some random action. They do nothing to hamper my experience.

[Taoofberg]

As soon as a tiny part of my brain thought these tasks were possible, my experience of playing the game changed: The bright and breezy take-it-easy nature of the game's entire design was shattered...

I am surprised to find that I completely agree with this.

I don't look at achievement lists anymore, because if I know what they are, they do have an impact on the way I play through sections. I don't think they should go away, though-- some people really like them, and everyone else can turn off notifications or not look through the list.

[mclem]

Article - Mass Effect 2 is another good example of letting a game's achievements piss all over a developer's cornflakes: Offering a 75g carrot on a string for anyone able to finish the game without losing any of their crew creates a sense of direction that /entirely undermined/ the spirit of the game.

If Nintendo ever do achievements, Fire Emblem will be the stuff of nightmares.

[Joni]

I have OCD tendencies in real life, and yet I'm not even obsessed with them. If I get a game to a high percentage, I'm going to try to complete it as long as it is fun, especially if the Trophies/Achievements show me something that I wouldn't normally try. Start God of War III on Hard instead of the normal I used to complete game? That is not ruining my experience. Finish the game five times? No, I'm not doing that.

[Aeris130]

Too late to get rid of them. Once you've been conditioned to get rewards for something, it gets less satisfying when the reward is removed. Players growing up with ps360 will be chasing carrots for the rest of their gaming lifes.

[TheShampion]

I really like achievements for arcadey and actiony titles, but for more narrative expieriences they can be dumb. It is cool when you can see where you follow your friend's progress in a game, but often that stuff is hidden anyway, so what is the point?

My favorite achievements are steam achievements. They are just good enough to keep me playing a game, but if a game doesn't have any, I don't really care.

[Zaptruder]

Gamerscore is a bit dumb; having this number next to your name that doesn't give you the picture on how many games you've beaten and to what extent you've beaten them, but is nonetheless supposed to be some representation of skill and ability is in a word... broken.

Personally, I'm not a trophy/gamerscore kind of player. I'd be lucky to finish most games nowadays - but there on occasion I do indulge in the madness. It's a nice easy way of adding additional abstract goals to the game outside of the context of the story or mission structure.

I can only really see it becoming a negative if you have neurotic OCD or self control issues.

I can see how that would be an issue with many gamers.

[The Boat]

My only problem with achievements is that they might encourage devs not to put extras or unlockables and rely on achievements instead. Together with DLC this seems like a problem at times.

Personally, I don't care about them, I'm not going to do anything I wouldn't anyway, but I guess it does make some people explore games in ways they wouldn't in the first place, which can be good or bad I guess.

[divisionbyzorro]

Mirror's Edge was ruined for me by that achievement.

To a lesser degree, Mass Effect 2 (the fact that we were told it was possible to save everybody made us play differently that we perhaps would have otherwise).

But in general, I like achievements when done right (see Geometry Wars 1/2).

[The Technomancer]

It seems to me that there's a lot of padding in achievements though. In most games I see today 85% of them or so break down to variants on "kill X enemies with weapon Y", "defeat a section without taking damage", or "collect X of a thing"

[Timber]

Have you guys seen what's popular over at kongregate.com?

[Paco]

Completely harmless, but fun for some. No reason to get rid of them.

[TheExorzist]

I love them but I don't need them in order to play a game. Which is good, I guess, because they help me to get more out of the games I love but don't hold me back when playing all the other games.

I still think achievements/trophies are the best thing that this gen has brought us. If you're not too obsessive on getting them they can actually help you to explore more aspects of your games.

And for all those saying that Nintendo is laughing... I bet they're more crying that they didn't implent a similar system into the 3DS. Who wants to bet that WiiU will have some kind of trophy/achievement system?

[flyinpiranha]

I despise them in multiplayer scenarios, because they alter player motivations depending on what it's asking for, leading to a deteriorated experience for everyone else. I also don't like that seemingly most games have a collectathon in them now solely for the purpose of an achievement.

These are 2 good points, the first more-so than the latter. I agree with the online ones being detrimental ... I forgot about this, I don't remember what game but there was one for killing with each weapon or in a certain spot so everybody was just camping that area.

The second point can really depend on the game as games have been collectathons for ages.

[Lunchbox]

that article over thinks achievements, just like most people who complain about them

if they are hurting your game its your own fault. you can turn off notifications and not even see them pop up. the multiplayer ones that cause problems are different and the designers fault in that case