-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Wii U will not have system-wide achievements
- Thread starter ULTROS!
- Start date
You are always knee deep in threads about systems or companies that you clearly don't give a damn about - I'm really concerned about your blood pressure, chill out dude
Aquamarine
Member
Wouldn't care in the slightest. Like most gamers. I care about individual achievements in games, getting 100% completion, not about some arbitrary inflated score that people exploit all the damn time.
It's like getting to the top of the leaderboards in a COD game. Everybody knows that it's easy to exploit/aimbot your way to the top, so your position is meaningless.
If you look at the numbers of :
games sold by publishers (no you don't get to remove 1rst parties too)
games sold
systems sold
You would actually know that the Wii was not some ghetto system nobody cared about, that would be the ps3...or the psp
No it actually was because they invested heavily in features that the Wii couldn't use (such as the whole dev pipeline that wasn't going to pay for itself). Achievement nobody ever cared about and you know it.
And fun fact : What nearly killed THQ was porting a widely popular wii game to the HD twins expecting similar success.
But yeah keep acting like facts don't matter to you we've got people like that here....unfortunately they're running the country.
Hm...
And these are comparable because...?
No, but it's nice to have an easily accessible list of what you played (accomplished?) in any given month/year, and it's also nice being able to compare your progress in a game with a friend's. It still doesn't have to be mandatory, but it should be tracked and supported by the system software.
Are there any reasons not to?
They have a function that serves the functions you have just stated, it's called the activity log. (Which IMO is better than an arbitrarily forced achievement system)
That's not even a proper argument. I could understand why it would be in MS' and Sony's favor to implement their tired trophy system again in their next-gen console, but the Wii didn't have any console-wide trophy system to begin with, so we don't really lose anything if the Wii U doesn't have it, either... Again, personally, I don't care about the whole gamerscore thing, but I do understand how it could affect others. I also would like to point out that it's less of a defining factor of buying a system than games themselves, for example.
It was directed to people that say they don't care about achievements.
are you fucking serious dude
Interfectum
Gold Member
Neither side needs to get so worked up over this. It's pretty simple...
Does it suck there won't be system wide achievements: Yes.
Is it a deal breaker that should keep people from buying Wii U? Hell no.
Pretty easy, imo.
Does it suck there won't be system wide achievements: Yes.
Is it a deal breaker that should keep people from buying Wii U? Hell no.
Pretty easy, imo.
lol... man you are on a roll.. so now it´s about hacking a system.. so it´s good that there isn´t a Achievment system, so that people don´t hack and cheat..
I normally don´t care about trophies/achievments. I keep telling myself that, but I tried playing some older PS3 games without trophies lately.. it just feels strange. I mean I don´t care for trophies but somehow the trophies have added something (for me), that gives games something extra.
HAMMEROFJUSTICE
Neo Member
pre-order cancelled.
Baconsammy
Banned
I like how this guy keeps speaking for "most" gamers.
Your first question is debatable, hence the thread
Your second one? Couldn't agree more.
I don't know why you think I'm getting worked up here. Yeah Nintendo fans spinning like crazy can be annoying but there's a big difference between annoying and infuriating.
KingItachi
Member
I don't enjoy them. As you said you won't see me complaining whether they're there or not.
OldJadedGamer
Banned
It's just disappointing to see standard last gen features missing from a "next gen" system. This is the same as when Sony announced no rumble in the controllers for PS3.
Those features are nothing, what could not be included later . How much time did it Sony take, to include this features, which only existed on the Xbox 360 by then (and were also a premium feature). A OS is a living thing, that evolves overtime, and Nintendo was always a company, that tries to make things work perfectly, before they release them (what doesn't always work out like Brawl's Online-Mode). This time they wanted the Miiverse ready, before anything else. I even could see Nintendo didn't want to release features like cross-game chat, party chat and achievements to force people into Miiverse (also one of Nintendo s favorites tactic) and they will deliver those features (expect achievements) later in the console lifetime. Everything that happens is a part of the companies philosophy.
You love there care, focus and own mindset or hate there perfectionism and forceful attitude.
Aquamarine
Member
Like those 90 million gamers on the Wii who were perfectly fine without system-wide achievements? I would say those fall under the umbrella of "most gamers."
Would be a bit annoyed (for all of ten seconds after which I shrug and go on not caring). I actually like gamerscore more than achievements, but that's because I approach it as some kind of irrational number that only gets bigger the more games you play, a bit like growing tall/old, even though, of course, that's not what it represents exactly.
The wii didn't have it, it wasn't standard.
You are always knee deep in threads about systems or companies that you clearly don't give a damn about - I'm really concerned about your blood pressure, chill out dude
It's true that the guy who got a Vita, never intend on buying a WiiU is now all of a sudden considering that nsmbU is more worth of his time than NintendoLand...
I guess we'll hear how he wouldn't want a WiiU port of a popular game the next time or something.
EatChildren
Currently polling second in Australia's federal election (first in the Gold Coast), this feral may one day be your Bogan King.
I've 100% achievement'd one game: Sleeping Dogs on PC. Otherwise I don't really care about achievements, unless they're tethered to rewards, or quirky fun. TF2's achievements are almost all designed around tutorialising essential tactics for each class, which is great for the obvious reasons, or quirky tricks and flukes, where it's nice to hear a cheer because you just can't believe you pulled something off.
Naughty Dog's work with the first two Uncharted games is also fantastic. Achievements themselves unexciting, but achievements linked to an in-game currency used for 'buying' behind the scenes videos, concept art, skins, weapons, cheat modes and more. To me that is awesome, because suddenly the idea of getting 100% achievements serves a bigger purpose than e-peen, but real in-game rewards. That's a great way of implementing them.
In any other case I couldn't give a shit and won't miss them.
However, I recognise them as a staple of the modern world of gaming. I have plenty of friends who love them, if to my bafflement, so much so that in the case of multiplatform titles they will always choose the 360 version due to that being their "main" achievement platform. I also have a few friends who always aim for 100% achievements, because they like having those goals. Arbitrary goals maybe, but goals none the less, and goals they're very happy to spend time working towards in their favourite games.
Given achievements are no longer a quirky gimmick tied to one or two platforms, but instead so universal they appear on at least three different platforms whenever a game is multiplatform (PC - Steam, 360 - LIVE, PS3 - PSN), it really wouldn't have hurt at all to pander to this expectation and standard and just fucking include them.
360 achievements are barely any different to PS3 achievements which are barely any different to PC achievements. It's all the same achievements with the same goals, the only difference being the way they're presented to the player (points, trophies, simple checklisting). Maybe people don't like them, much like I don't, but it's there's no loss including them. It's a box to tick, an achievement if you will, to bring a platform to a 'modern standard', at least in terms of what a very huge portion of gamers are used to, even those who don't use them.
It's better to have something than not, and in this case I don't believe Nintendo has any real, legitimate reason not to include them beyond a stubborn refusal to conform to a norm. An admirable quality when applied appropriately, but I don't believe this is one of those cases.
Naughty Dog's work with the first two Uncharted games is also fantastic. Achievements themselves unexciting, but achievements linked to an in-game currency used for 'buying' behind the scenes videos, concept art, skins, weapons, cheat modes and more. To me that is awesome, because suddenly the idea of getting 100% achievements serves a bigger purpose than e-peen, but real in-game rewards. That's a great way of implementing them.
In any other case I couldn't give a shit and won't miss them.
However, I recognise them as a staple of the modern world of gaming. I have plenty of friends who love them, if to my bafflement, so much so that in the case of multiplatform titles they will always choose the 360 version due to that being their "main" achievement platform. I also have a few friends who always aim for 100% achievements, because they like having those goals. Arbitrary goals maybe, but goals none the less, and goals they're very happy to spend time working towards in their favourite games.
Given achievements are no longer a quirky gimmick tied to one or two platforms, but instead so universal they appear on at least three different platforms whenever a game is multiplatform (PC - Steam, 360 - LIVE, PS3 - PSN), it really wouldn't have hurt at all to pander to this expectation and standard and just fucking include them.
360 achievements are barely any different to PS3 achievements which are barely any different to PC achievements. It's all the same achievements with the same goals, the only difference being the way they're presented to the player (points, trophies, simple checklisting). Maybe people don't like them, much like I don't, but it's there's no loss including them. It's a box to tick, an achievement if you will, to bring a platform to a 'modern standard', at least in terms of what a very huge portion of gamers are used to, even those who don't use them.
It's better to have something than not, and in this case I don't believe Nintendo has any real, legitimate reason not to include them beyond a stubborn refusal to conform to a norm. An admirable quality when applied appropriately, but I don't believe this is one of those cases.
Your first question is debatable, hence the thread
Your second one? Couldn't agree more.
the second is debatable not the first...
the first imply having a feature and it's always good to have a feature (even more when is pretty much the standard everywhere else), the second is a matter of taste.
Baconsammy
Banned
On which console did the majority of cross-platform games sell this past generation? Did that console have achievements? Yep.
I... wouldn't care? I have no idea how many trophies I have. I have more of a clue about my gamerscore but in the end, it's really just a number. A number you get from buying games and completing chapter X in a story.
This is a strange outrage to have.
Wrestlemania
Banned
Just my Gamerscore? Wouldn't care in the slightest. Meaningless number.
All my achievements? That'd be a bummer. I like having something as even a small record of some of the things I've done in a game. I'd be sad if my 3DS activity log was wiped as well.
Having a feature is not a matter of taste, but wheter or not you enjoy that feature is.
OldJadedGamer
Banned
The Wii also wasn't the standard system when it came to third party games.
Cross game chat is not and has never been a premium feature on 360 since 2005.
Correlation does not imply causation.
So now you're not a gamer if you don't own one of the cross platforme multiplayer games that are dime a dozen?
I wonder where the goal post will be moved next time.
Interfectum
Gold Member
alfredofroylan
Member
I don't care, Gamescores doens't have any real value. If they used it to trade it for goodies, minigames or extras that'll be awesome. But so far is just a "status quo" symbol in the gaming world.
Agent Unknown
Member
Not an Achievement/trophy addict but there are a lot of people who are and this is yet another completely stupid decision which makes their "We're going after the core gamer!" statements all the more laughable. It's a decision which will also possibly undermine how much people will care about Miiverse.
ThingontheFloor
Member
The work will already be done on multiplatform games. It seems like it's more of Nintendo not deeming it important enough to include them on a system level rather than looking out for developers time or money.
OldJadedGamer
Banned
Agree, this and lack of online features just make the WiiU a first party game machine again.
Baconsammy
Banned
I responded to a weak argument with a weak response. That was the point.
And here comes an argument out of left field that doesn't pertain to anything being talked about.
Sadly this. And I'm assuming this is why so many third parties that seemed to be hyped for the Wii U 2 years ago were suddenly not so enthused this past E3. Finding out all the things it doesnt do compared to the competition will kill a third party boner pretty quick.
which is exactly what i said, you can ignore or not the feature but you cannot say that is good because it doesn't have one
I don't necessarily need points/trophies for everything I do in a game, but it is extremely disappointing that the Wii U apparently doesn't have a permanent system that will allow you to see a friend's progress in all games. The Walking Dead achievments are the kind that all unlock in the course of normal play, but it is really really nice to be able to open somebody's achievments and see which episodes they've played or how far they are in the latest episode even if they haven't booted the game up in months.
I don't so much care about e-peen, but I'd like uniform progress-tracking.
I don't so much care about e-peen, but I'd like uniform progress-tracking.
Fair enough then.
Considering I only use trophies/achievements as a way to add extra optional objectives to games, and not to show off how much free time I have, this is fine with me.
It's too bad I won't be able to stalk my friends and see how far along they are in the games they're playing, though.
It's too bad I won't be able to stalk my friends and see how far along they are in the games they're playing, though.
Aquamarine
Member
There were practically no Wii/360/PS3 direct ports.
Either the Wii got a severely watered down version, or a spinoff.
And both you and I know that it was because the Wii's hardware was severely handicapped, NOT the fact that the Wii didn't have achievements.
To say people were "fine" is a pretty big assumption. It's not like anyone had a choice if they wanted to play Zelda or Mario, and I've heard nothing but complaints amongst those I know about the Wii's approach to online infrastructure (achievements, friends lists, an account-bound digital library). We had to travel to 2004 in order to play some very good games, but no one wants to remain there.
Haunted
Member
The false assumption here is that the people who are defending Nintendo on this issue own any other systems in the first place.
Similar threads
- Poll