Trophies and Achievements...

[lisalover1]

How do you feel about them? You find em' good? Bad? How much importance do you put in them?

Personally: I hate trophies and achievements. Why? Because I believe I'm quite literally addicted to them. Not kidding. Nowadays I find a serious lack of accomplishment if I don't get a lot of the trophies in a game. Example: I bought Battlefield: Bad Company 2 a while back. I didn't like the game. The multiplayer was fun when it worked (Almost never), and the single player was a wasteful snore fest. I returned the game a week after purchasing. But you know what? I felt regret at returning the game because it had really easy trophies and I only got 57% of them. Because of this I find myself often playing on harder difficulties or buying games known for there difficulty in order to still feel accomplished. I also find it hard to buy any PS3 games that don't have trophies because they came out too early (Valkyria Chronicles, Devil May Cry 4, etc...). Seriously, I think I need rehab or something for this bullshit.

What about you guys?

I would just like to point out that Valkyria Chronicles DID have a trophy system. That's what the ingame metals were. VC is very old school in that way, the challenges are within the game itself, not some list of things on the PS3's main menu that have to cater to Sony's trophy guidelines

Final Fantasy 12 also had a cool in-game achievement/trophy system that I really liked. Personally, I find it interesting that these two games actually had far better challenges for players to complete than they probably would have with actual achievement/trophy support had those things been available back when these games came out

Interesting to see the kind of challenges a developer can come up with for players when there's no "corporate" influence(looking at you Microsoft)

Well, VC gave you medals for completing missions with an A ranking; as far as I know, it didn't give you any rewards for doing anything challenging AND out of the ordinary, like, say, completing a mission using only engineers. That would normally be something asked for in a trophy.

[Gamerforlife]

How do you feel about them? You find em' good? Bad? How much importance do you put in them?

Personally: I hate trophies and achievements. Why? Because I believe I'm quite literally addicted to them. Not kidding. Nowadays I find a serious lack of accomplishment if I don't get a lot of the trophies in a game. Example: I bought Battlefield: Bad Company 2 a while back. I didn't like the game. The multiplayer was fun when it worked (Almost never), and the single player was a wasteful snore fest. I returned the game a week after purchasing. But you know what? I felt regret at returning the game because it had really easy trophies and I only got 57% of them. Because of this I find myself often playing on harder difficulties or buying games known for there difficulty in order to still feel accomplished. I also find it hard to buy any PS3 games that don't have trophies because they came out too early (Valkyria Chronicles, Devil May Cry 4, etc...). Seriously, I think I need rehab or something for this bullshit.

What about you guys?

I would just like to point out that Valkyria Chronicles DID have a trophy system. That's what the ingame metals were. VC is very old school in that way, the challenges are within the game itself, not some list of things on the PS3's main menu that have to cater to Sony's trophy guidelines

Final Fantasy 12 also had a cool in-game achievement/trophy system that I really liked. Personally, I find it interesting that these two games actually had far better challenges for players to complete than they probably would have with actual achievement/trophy support had those things been available back when these games came out

Interesting to see the kind of challenges a developer can come up with for players when there's no "corporate" influence(looking at you Microsoft)

Well, VC gave you medals for completing missions with an A ranking; as far as I know, it didn't give you any rewards for doing anything challenging AND out of the ordinary, like, say, completing a mission using only engineers. That would normally be something asked for in a trophy.

Yeah, I guess, but why would I WANT to complete a mission with only engineers. That would just be annoying. Now there is a DLC that has missions specifically tailored around each unit type. Now that's different, I don't mind using engineers only if the level is designed around that. VC isn't a game that encourages you to handicap yourself. It's annoying enough just getting A ranks in some levels with the units they give you.

It's actually more fun "breaking" the game and circumventing some of the things that make A ranking some stages so annoying. I love abusing orders and potentials to beef up Alicia and simply rush through a stage with her for example. Or learning how to take out two or three enemies at once with one use of a shocktrooper's machine gun.

VC's medals are built around doing everything in the game, which is how I like achievements/trophies to be. Though it does have a few dumb ones like your typical story completion ones or the "kill so many enemy ones", but overall I think they did a good job in that area despite how I tend to criticize the game for other things

[hashiriya1]

I completely ignore them and don't care for them. I get unlocked achievements for simply choosing a specific character in a game. Is that really an "achievement"? I think it is a lame idea. Just set your own goals and achieve them. I am not going to let somebody else tell me what I should do with my game.

[lisalover1]

but why would I WANT to complete a mission with only engineers.

Because I triple-dog-dared you to!

[Gamerforlife]

but why would I WANT to complete a mission with only engineers.

Because I triple-dog-dared you to!

Damn

(boots up Valkyria Chronicles)

[Plantguy7]

I agree with the people who said it prolongs the life of games, I find myself playing some games long after I beat the story just to get achievements. I think the extra challenge adds a lot of fun to the games (usually). One thing I don't like though is online achievements, mostly from Halo. They're always ridiculous like do a somersault and then snipe 5 people with the gravity hammer (obviously exaggerated, but you get the point), and it gets really frustrating trying to do little stunts like that in multiplayer. Even more frustrating is the "49/50 achievements" you get from not doing the online ones >.>

[Dakinggamer87]

I play games because I enjoy them for the experience they provide on their own. Something is wrong if you need points awarded for an experience you should have been happy to have based on its own merit.

I agree!! I do like achievements/trophies because I like how it adds replay value with some of the extra challenges but at end of the day I play them for the great experiences and overall fun!!

[ZeroAX]

I love getting a platinum trophy in a game I love. I like that it pushes me to play the game I like in new ways, how it pushes me to see its entire content, and how I get a small "reward" to show off. For me every platinum trophy I ever got means I LOVE THIS GAME. That is why I only have 4 platinum trophies out of the 20-30 games for the PS3 that have passed through my hands.

What disappoints me the most about achievements/trophies though, is that gamers only use them as the means to enlarge their e-penis. They'll play ANY shitty game, that has easy achievements, so that they can further their "cause".

This is so different from the high scores of the old days. Back then, you didn't just try to get a high score on whichever game you could find. You only tried to get a high score on your favorite games. What mattered wasn't the high score, but the journey there. How you'd learn a games tricks, how you'd explore a stage for secrets. Stuff that gave you purpose to replay your favorite game again.


But modern gamers, chase the modern equivalent with special guides, with friends boosting them through achievements, and worst of all as I said above, with playing games they don't actually like. I believe it's kind of sad if you think about it. A person is doing something he doesn't like, to get a small, without any real meaning or substance, reward. And people complain about sucky jobs.


That is why I think achievements can be a great thing if designed properly, and most of all, if hunted for because you want to play more of your favorite game, and not to show off a stupid number online.

[gennss]

For me they give the game more replay value. Giving me goals a little further on than what I would normally consider as "done"

Normally i'd be ok, thats the end, i beat it and shelf it. Now I try to get a few more achievements before shelvving it adding hours of gameplay to a game that I normally wouldn't have continued beyond the standard ending.

Shmups and Fighters are the exception.

[jfrost]

Just bought Bit.Trip BEAT on PC and one of the Steam achievements is beating the game with Razer's motion controller. That's lovely.