Love them or hate them, those Xbox 360 achievements have become a staple of the system. The little blips of joy are so annoying and addicting for some that we're shocked the PS3 and/or Wii didn't implement them. There's an interesting thread going on over at the International Game Developers Association forums started by Raphael Van Lierop (Relic, 3D Realms) where he believes the achievements have taken gamers off course.
Lierop writes, "I have many friends who LOVE achievements. They love the bragging rights, they love being able to compare achievements they obtained to other people ... Personally, I dislike them...a lot. I find they are changing the way we play games, and the focus of the games we play, and make. I feel that games should be crafted to have enough intrinsic reward, that a secondary external reward system should not be required... was it really necessary for us to go back to the old 'High Score' system from the days of arcade games? I would have hoped that the gameplay and immersiveness of the 'next gen' gaming experience would have been enough reward, and that we wouldn't have had to fall back on cheap gimmicks."
Now before y'all go flippin' out, go and check out the thread first. Remember, it's an IGDA thread, so for the most part these are the guys who make the games the rest of us play. And please try to keep the comments on the topic of thoughts related to achievements. Have you found "achievements" to be actual achievements as part of regular gameplay or have you found them to be asinine randomness? Should you only hit the 20% mark in achievements for a game after you've beaten it? Should you get the easy level achievements automatically if you beat a higher level (that one's annoying as anything)? The achievement system is here to stay, what can developers do to tweak it so that there's some uniformity to the system and only a minor amount of absurdity?
[Via GameSetWatch]
Reader Comments (73)
Posted: Jun 2nd 2007 11:04AM (Unverified) said
Man I love achievements. I don't play games for the gamerscore I see it as an added bonus, they can also add a lot of replay value to a game I would probably never play again after beating it. To each their own.
Reply
Posted: Jun 2nd 2007 11:05AM LetsHaveWaffles said
Ok, first things first. If yuo base the skill of a person off of the amount of point that person has is dumb and not smart. I don't look at people that have 10,000 points or more and say he must be really good at gaming. I look at the games that person plays and base it off of that. If I see that the person has 10,000 kills in Gears, then I'm slightly more intimated and eager to challege the person. If I didn't know he had 10,000 kills then I would have been caught off guard and ot ready for him. I have to say there are alot of gamerscore whores, but I really don't care. I'm not racing to have more gamerscore points then someone else, I'm racing myself. I tell myself, that I can get to 6,000 points. It's an extra step and making me feel like yeah, I was able to do that. (Paying for crappy games for achievement points is extremely dumb) I only play games I'm interested in.
Reply
Posted: Jun 2nd 2007 3:53PM BIGGEN said
so what if someone plays king kong to get achievements, that's their right if they want to. so many people seem to be spewing how other gamers should play. i say fuck you people. you have the same games on ps3 and wii, but playing it on the 360 gives it that little something extra. and it IS an achievement to complete games like COD2 and R6V on veteran and realistic, therefore, you deserve something for it. even if it is a bleep sound and a score, it's still a nice addition. it does add replay value. if you want to pay $60 for a game to play on the ps3, go ahead, that's your right. personally, i choose the 360 versions of games over my ps3 for achievements, better graphics, better controller (which means better gameplay), and the fact that most have multiplayer that just exceeds everything else because of LIVE. ps3 is nice, but doesn't quite hold my interest. the wii just flat out sucks. i hardly ever turn it on anymore.
Reply
Posted: Jun 2nd 2007 12:49PM (Unverified) said
The GoW system was great. If I beat the game on hard, then I have technically beaten it on easy so should get extra points. The system should be Easy, Normal and Hard all have the same number of points, but if you beat it on Normal you will actually get double points, so you are rewarded. E.G.
Easy- 20
Normal- 20
Hard-20
Beat on Easy-20
Beat on Normal-40
Beat on Hard-60
That is the system I want.
And I hate online achievements, Host 50 matches, play the game Co-Op. Isn't single player harder? Atleast 33% of points should be gained by beating the game on Hard.
And you should never have to perform 1000 headshots online, PDZ I am looking at you.
Some online achievements are fine, but Vegas made me spend so much time playing MP I wouldn't allow myself to play it anymore (after 100+ hours), plus the game kept freezing.
Reply
Easy- 20
Normal- 20
Hard-20
Beat on Easy-20
Beat on Normal-40
Beat on Hard-60
That is the system I want.
And I hate online achievements, Host 50 matches, play the game Co-Op. Isn't single player harder? Atleast 33% of points should be gained by beating the game on Hard.
And you should never have to perform 1000 headshots online, PDZ I am looking at you.
Some online achievements are fine, but Vegas made me spend so much time playing MP I wouldn't allow myself to play it anymore (after 100+ hours), plus the game kept freezing.
Posted: Jun 2nd 2007 2:50PM Triforceowner said
I think the only way achievements can be considered a bad thing are if they pop up at the wrong time. If an achievement pops up in the middle of a cut-scene or something; that ruins the cinematic quality. Thankfully they don't normally do this, so it's OK.
Reply
Posted: Jun 2nd 2007 3:37PM (Unverified) said
@Evan,
I've found that the percentage of tools varies per title. For example, Halo 2 has a ton. Catan has almost none. Perfect Dark Zero has very few. Lost Planet has more than PDZ but nowhere near as many as Halo 2. Most of the XBLA games I've played online have been relatively tool free. PGR3 seemed like it was full of whiners. I accidentally bumped someone in my first online race and the dude started screaming at me for not being this totally awesome racer right off the bat.
I haven't even gone online with Gears yet (other than co-op) because it seems likely to attract a high percentage of morons. Not saying everyone who plays it is. It just seems like I'd be more likely to run into someone who's the kind of person who ruins sessions of Halo 2. But you can avoid doofuses with a good friends list and by playing the right titles.
Reply
I've found that the percentage of tools varies per title. For example, Halo 2 has a ton. Catan has almost none. Perfect Dark Zero has very few. Lost Planet has more than PDZ but nowhere near as many as Halo 2. Most of the XBLA games I've played online have been relatively tool free. PGR3 seemed like it was full of whiners. I accidentally bumped someone in my first online race and the dude started screaming at me for not being this totally awesome racer right off the bat.
I haven't even gone online with Gears yet (other than co-op) because it seems likely to attract a high percentage of morons. Not saying everyone who plays it is. It just seems like I'd be more likely to run into someone who's the kind of person who ruins sessions of Halo 2. But you can avoid doofuses with a good friends list and by playing the right titles.
Posted: Jun 2nd 2007 4:29PM (Unverified) said
James: But you must admit that most major commercial titles are not artistic pursuits. They might have a little commentary sprinkled in because people made them, but Madden isn't going to lose any of its value from achievements.
For a game like BioShock, on the other hand, I would agree that achievements have to be handled VERY carefully if they don't want to trivialize the game.
Reply
For a game like BioShock, on the other hand, I would agree that achievements have to be handled VERY carefully if they don't want to trivialize the game.
Posted: Jun 2nd 2007 5:11PM (Unverified) said
Achievements are another way for RIPOFF "MS" to sell sh*tty games period!
Reply
Posted: Jun 2nd 2007 7:15PM (Unverified) said
Achievement Points is something in which i have a love/hate relationship.
I think Achievements are great for Campaign Play, and that it adds to the replay/resell value of the game.
On the other hand, I think that Multiplayer Achievements are ruining gaming.
I hate running into kids that play team-based games that want only their achievements, and care nothing about the game, or winning.
Please, Microsoft, remove achievements from Ranked Games where Competitive Players play. Put them in Unranked, where no one cares whether you're getting achievements, winning, losing, playing with friends or even cheating.
I thought the purpose of "Ranked" was Stat Tracking, Leaderboards, Clans, etc.....not Achievement Whores.
Reply
I think Achievements are great for Campaign Play, and that it adds to the replay/resell value of the game.
On the other hand, I think that Multiplayer Achievements are ruining gaming.
I hate running into kids that play team-based games that want only their achievements, and care nothing about the game, or winning.
Please, Microsoft, remove achievements from Ranked Games where Competitive Players play. Put them in Unranked, where no one cares whether you're getting achievements, winning, losing, playing with friends or even cheating.
I thought the purpose of "Ranked" was Stat Tracking, Leaderboards, Clans, etc.....not Achievement Whores.
Posted: Jun 4th 2007 7:04AM (Unverified) said
Posted: Jun 2nd 2007 11:34PM (Unverified) said
Here's a crazy idea: Why don't developers intergrate the achievements factor from the littler games into the bigger games?
I know this isn't a relevant example but here goes: How about if you manage to reach level 50 of Joust LIVE, you unlock a hidden level or character for the next big FPS? Or a rare weapon for Mass Effect when it comes out?
Developers: Make Xbox LIVE work for YOU. Make the players really bust their asses for these "Achievements"
And no, I don't own a 360. ;)
Reply
I know this isn't a relevant example but here goes: How about if you manage to reach level 50 of Joust LIVE, you unlock a hidden level or character for the next big FPS? Or a rare weapon for Mass Effect when it comes out?
Developers: Make Xbox LIVE work for YOU. Make the players really bust their asses for these "Achievements"
And no, I don't own a 360. ;)
Posted: Jun 3rd 2007 3:43AM (Unverified) said
I'm not sure how old the devs are but I'm 46 and my gamer tag is what I used to put on my high scores in the spacies parlour - once they moved to more than 3 letters of course. I was dating my wife at the time.
High Score tables and your name in lights is some of what drove the competitive nature in us in the 80's and it's great to see them back.
Avhievements are another high score table but also when done well add to the playability level that a game has.
I've grown up gaming since the 80's and in my recent gaming experience ( I have 140 Xbox games and completed about 70% ) developers slacken off in the second half of games in the knowledge that most people won't complete them.
The best levels are nearly always put first. Achievements that encourage gamers to play a game through, to actually complete presumably will put pressure on devs to come up with later levels that are as playable / pretty / sustaining as the first that you see. Ramping up the difficulty level to disguise shoddy design and work just will not cut it over time.
For many people achievements are just fine and dandy - keep putting them in, keep being innovative and creative with them - we like the humourous ones as well and the ones that are hard to get - Bejeweled anyone.
All in all they add value they don't take it away.
Reply
High Score tables and your name in lights is some of what drove the competitive nature in us in the 80's and it's great to see them back.
Avhievements are another high score table but also when done well add to the playability level that a game has.
I've grown up gaming since the 80's and in my recent gaming experience ( I have 140 Xbox games and completed about 70% ) developers slacken off in the second half of games in the knowledge that most people won't complete them.
The best levels are nearly always put first. Achievements that encourage gamers to play a game through, to actually complete presumably will put pressure on devs to come up with later levels that are as playable / pretty / sustaining as the first that you see. Ramping up the difficulty level to disguise shoddy design and work just will not cut it over time.
For many people achievements are just fine and dandy - keep putting them in, keep being innovative and creative with them - we like the humourous ones as well and the ones that are hard to get - Bejeweled anyone.
All in all they add value they don't take it away.
Posted: Jun 3rd 2007 11:00AM Mr Khan said
The only problem with achievements are that developers are forced to integrate them, thus insuring that there's going to be quite a bit of bullshit out there
The devs that do well with it obviously enjoy and understand the concept, and if it were an option, they would've taken it, while the ones that make bullshit (NBA Live 06) probably would've opted out
Reply
The devs that do well with it obviously enjoy and understand the concept, and if it were an option, they would've taken it, while the ones that make bullshit (NBA Live 06) probably would've opted out
Posted: Jun 3rd 2007 2:52PM Lucid00 said
I feel the achievement system should've been implemented slightly differently (I dunno how though). I really wish there were some set of credits you get for them that add up to downloadable extra's in which ever game, (ala Win a tournament in Tony Hawk to buy a new car in Forza) but sadly all of the games give points differently and there's no real standard for the points so it'd be a bit more difficult for Microsoft to run, then the other thing is certain games should either not have the achievements (think RPGs). It probably shouldn't be forced on developers (then again, if they weren't they'd probably appear rarely in games).
Reply
Posted: Jun 4th 2007 12:30PM (Unverified) said
¨...was it really necessary for us to go back to the old 'High Score' system from the days of arcade games?¨
This fellow is acting as though we are lowering ourselves because we desire to get achievements. Stick to Wii Sports if you don´t want to play grown man video games. The Xbox 360 is able to offer a lot of features, but for how easy it is to use them its just as easy not to.
Reply
This fellow is acting as though we are lowering ourselves because we desire to get achievements. Stick to Wii Sports if you don´t want to play grown man video games. The Xbox 360 is able to offer a lot of features, but for how easy it is to use them its just as easy not to.
Posted: Jun 4th 2007 11:41AM MagusDF said
Achievements in games is a mixed bag. But it really depends on the game. Games like crackdown and Viva Piñata it makes sense they’re not overly story driven games with room for competition. There is a place for the higher score and competitive outlook. But on the same hand games that are story driven tend to loose a lot of emersion. Gears of war, blue dragon, even halo 2/3 single player. I think its a bigger distraction. I can also see that from a developer perspective developers getting lazier and relying too much extrinsic rewards rather than really developing something that pushes the player forward and provides motivation to finish a game.
If anything I would push the question over to are mandatory achievements for every game a larger problem.
Reply
If anything I would push the question over to are mandatory achievements for every game a larger problem.
Posted: Jun 5th 2007 4:30PM (Unverified) said
I don't have a 360 but plan on getting one soon. I'll want the achievements because it lets me keep playing a game even when the story is over and makes me feel accomplished when I'm done. If I play other games and finish them, I think "Well, that game's done and unless I brag online about it, it means nothing."
Reply
Posted: Jun 7th 2007 7:17PM (Unverified) said
This argument is stupid. It's the same exact game in the end. The TMNT game is the same game on all platforms. But on the 360 platform, you get a sort of trophy if you beat the mini-games that stays with the system.
In the end, the games are still the same, but the achievements not only add extra gameplay they give you a award for doing more with the game then what is required to "beat" it.
Reply
In the end, the games are still the same, but the achievements not only add extra gameplay they give you a award for doing more with the game then what is required to "beat" it.
Posted: Jun 7th 2007 2:46PM Atomicwaist said
I don't mind achievement points, but I also do not focus on them. I've had my 360 since launch and may have purchased 10 games for it since then. My Wii on the other hand is quickly approaching the same achievment almost a full year earlier. Now this is partly due to the fact that I perfer to play RPGs over other genres, but I laso love to play adventure games like Tomb Raider. While I can not wait for games like Blue Dragon and Lost Odyssey, I'm also slightly worried that the little "acheivment unlocked" icon and sound will detract from my imersion in the game. When I sit down and play an RPG, most recently .DotHack//GU, in order for me to be able to complete it within a reasonable time frame I need to be constantly immersed in the game; the second I am snapped back to reality I have to save and come back to it later. So I don't mind the GamerScore, I just wish that I did not feel like less of gamer when I compare my gamerscore of 780 to friends with at least 1660 (lowest gamerscore on my friend's list) and that I had the option to turn of the giant icon, the noise doesnt bother me as much as the icon.
Reply
Posted: Jun 14th 2007 9:41PM (Unverified) said
I personally love the Achievement system. Granted it has it's faults (Achievements like the one for sitting through the credits on "Guitar Hero 2"), but it's also gotten me to try things I never would've considered (like putting novelty masks on ten zombies in "Dead Rising"). It got me to go further in a game than I would've previously.
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.
Featured Stories
The most popular posts
in the last 7 days
- Vita 'UMD Passport' won't be offered in US 220 comments
- Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning review: A tempting fate 153 comments
- David Jaffe leaves Eat Sleep Play, layoffs hit developer [Update] 108 comments
- Don't call it a remake: Final Fantasy X is a 'remaster,' to be clear 95 comments
- Battleship movie adapted into FPS by Double Helix 93 comments







