Personally, loathe this trend for meta-game garbage. You just know it's going to be an avenue for developers to put the most mind-numbing and formulaic tasks that should have been integrated with the plot and design of the game itself.
A properly structured game should not need accomplishments.
Games have always had 'meta game garbage' in them, starting with having a score.
There have always been games that reward performance with meaningless doodads like bronze, silver, or gold medals. Etc.
Every game that's ever had a 'statistics' screen is the same way, tracking everything from your time played, steps taken, shots fired, enemies killed, items collected, locations found, etc. All 'meaningless' bars to fill up.
Honestly, it always seemed to me what bugged people about achievements was the hype tied in to Xbox Live, broadcasting the achievements, and the formalization of a culture about achieving meta game goals. The dire warnings about how achievements will ruin games are not new; that was day one talk in 2005. And as with everything, it depends on how such ideas are used, not whether the idea should be tried at all.
It has been often said for years that the Xbox style achievement system is flawed, and other systems are better. A better example is the way blizzard uses achievements in their games now, or even the achievement system in Guild Wars 2 (which follows the blizzard model). The achievements are more like a roadmap of everything to do in the game, in advance, with surprising granularity. They call attention to goals one can aim for, and things to explore and find.
I guess it's just amazing such vitriol when the ship for formal meta game system has already sailed. They've been here for six years, and are just getting more refined. It's not going anywhere.
