Trophies/Archievements - do you care about them?

[Ruldra]

Do you bother going after all those archievements listed for each game? Do you only go after those that aren't too hard to get? Or do you simply don't care at all?

Back when I got a PS3, I thought the whole thing was stupid and I told myself I wouldn't bother with it. After playing for a while, I ended up changing my mind; it makes you try different things you wouldn't do otherwise and get some extra fun out of your games.

For stuff that I really enjoy (Demon's Souls, Zen Pinball), I do try to get them all and it's really satisfying when you do. Otherwise, if I don't like the game that much and I don't feel like playing it anymore, I'll just go after the remaining easy ones and be done with it.

The whole system can become an obsession, though. There are sites devoted to archievement-hunting (like this one and this one), and many players buy and play crap games just for extra trophies. Ask this guy if he still play games for fun.

Well, what about you? Do you like hunting for archievements?

[TidusBlade]

Yeah haha I used to think achievements were cheap excuses to add gameplay before I got a 360 but ow I actually started liking the system a bit.

Really depends on the game though, if it's more score based like Tetris or Mushi I tend to try as much of them as I can, it's fun to see if you can get those hard ones since they're actually something worth aiming for, like defeating the stage 5 boss or clearing 250 lines. If I was playing Tetris obviously I'd be trying to clear more lines in one game so putting in one for clearing more lines is meaningful as it's actually an "achievement".

On games like Red Dead Redemption though, or really any games with a story/no scoring system etc., I usually couldn't care less, if it's on my way I might go for it and if there's a fun one like the Dastardly achievement then I wouldn't pass it either xD

Most seem to come from finishing the story which I end up collecting anyways, but ones that make me go out of my way like collect all the x or defeat y whatever's really feel like grinding, just a cheap way to add more gameplay hours.

Buying crappy games to hoard achievements or spending days replaying some boring/frustrating/unfair part to get that last little sucker worth 90 points is a waste of time imo, I just don't enjoy it.

The achievements sites aren't so bad though, but when it gets to the point where you really don't enjoy the game itself anymore (Like that guy linked to lol) or when you're buying games just for the points + epeen on your achievements/trophies sig (Hell, there's even lists and articles for the best games to boost your gamerscore xD) then it's just not fun anymore...

[Slump]

I don't particularly care about achievements in games but I can't think of an argument for why games would be better off without them. I mean they don't take away from the game in anyway as far as I can tell and for those who do care, I know a few of these people, achievements add a lot of replayability to games. For me, it usually depends on the game and the achievement itself. If the achievement is actually challenging to attain then I'll probably go for it at some point but I'm not one who replays a game simply for gaining achievements I missed the first time through. Like I said though, I think they do more to add to the games rather than detract from them so I'm all for them if they float your boat!

[EPS21]

As far as the all the 360 shmups are concerned, looking at what other challenges to do can be a nice respite from the usual try to 1cc/score high from doing full runs and practicing stages. Sometimes doing quirky things for the achievement can be fun and something you'd never even think about doing before.

I'll admit I care a bit about them, but mostly for games I really love and want to 100% in (Spiritual Larsa, someday!!), but as far as caring about that number next to your name in the dashboard is beyond stupid. Grindfest achievements are no fun either, and a shame there's a few in GaludaII for game modes I don't really like so I'll likely give those up unless I'm really bored.

People on either side of the extremes about achievements just need to take it easy. Ardent haters, give them a chance and see if there's something worth doing in there. And the achievement whores of course, need to remind themselves what a game is

[Damocles]

I think of them as an interesting aside to games I feel like I'm not done playing. Far too many are inevitable or involve simple collection. As mentioned before, they're best when encouraging an alternate or unconventional playing style.

[Battlesmurf]

I think of them as an interesting aside to games I feel like I'm not done playing. Far too many are inevitable or involve simple collection. As mentioned before, they're best when encouraging an alternate or unconventional playing style.

I came here to post my discontent with the collecting part. I like it when ach's motivate me to do something I wouldn't have otherwise- or to finish off a game. I hate collecting stuff with a passion. It breaks the pace on tons of stuff. Intel on COD4? Intel on MW2? So- any sense of urgency is ruined by "let's spend 20 minutes a level hunting books and laptops and crap!". There's a TON of offenders out there. Screw busywork

Give me extra points for finishing on hard? Cool. Extra points for doing an xx combo in Batman? Sweet. Anything that makes me try a little harder is satisfying for games I like

(I did have some battles in my earlier 360 days- so ignore whatever my points say now ).

[Vexorg]

I've had my 360 since launch day and I still have a gamerscore below 10,000. That should give you a pretty good idea. I've only maxed out gamerscore on two games (SotN and Lego Indiana Jones.)

[Kaiser]

http://ps3trophycard.com/profile/Maneater1983

^ This profile says that I do care about trophies. I only platinum games I do enjoy . I was meant to platinum both Yakuza 3 and Ratchet & Clank: A crack in time recently but I lost my saves due HDD dying..... FUU-----------. Also i'm not a trophy whore because I don't get platinums which are obscurely hard to get, like Killzone 2 (I don't have time to do Grand Valor Cross aka be in 1/100 of players in a week) or Lost Planet 2 (Screw the noms de guerre trophy).

EDIT: Also I don't get platinums on games which do not have a working online anymore like Red Faction guerilla. So I get all the reasonable trophies for me

[sirmax]

I care only for achievements, that are unlockable in singleplayer, doesn't require to much time/effort/grinding and I just care, when I already finished the main mode (i.e. story). Although these rules can be overridden whenever I feel a personal challenge.

[Ed Oscuro]

I get a lot out of the Achievement system, when it's done right. Many games have the crappy "kill X number of dudes with the shotgun" style Achievements which are a waste of time. Some (like Half-Life 2) have too many easy Achievements that you get by playing the game (one of the most infamous Achievements I know of is for The Simpsons: Hit and Run, I believe, which gives you an Achievement for starting a game or some stupid thing like that).

I think that the idea of Achievements started with Battlefield 2 - that was more or less a straightforward stats system and it was all based on kills / points / time (i.e. you had to have so many hours flying around those tiny maps in a jet, along with x number of kills, to get the next rank or get the Air Service badge, for example). Somewhere along the line somebody took it to the logical next step.

I agree with Damocles and others that they're best when they encourage a different play style. I don't think it's implemented especially well in Half-Life 2, where the "Zombie Chopper" (iirc) Achievement locks you into using only the gravity gun - but it's a step in the right direction anyway.

Probably one of the worst Achievements I've heard of was for the 2008 release of Turok - for a time there was a "newbie achievement" that had you kill a person, die, and also get a teamkill, because the team thought that since it was what most players did when they first played, they should reward it. Not an especially popular one!

I like a system that ties in with ranks or some customizability, a bit like Call of Duty 4 (though that suicide grenade one...ugh)

Yeah, grinding out Achievements is failure. That's one thing I appreciate about many Valve games.

[TLB]

I've had my 360 for a year and 3/4 or so, and I've never once felt any compulsion to get any achievement ever. I just keep forgetting to turn off the notifications, that shit is annoying when I'm shooting something and HEY LOOK U GOT WORTHLESS NUMBERS LOLOLOLOL GJ U R SO COOL ACHEIV THIS

i really, really dislike the name. that may even be what i hate most about it. "achievements". you haven't achieved shit. try overthrowing a dictator or something.
"but metals, what if you get an achievement for 1cc!?!?! u stupid fuckar!!" yeah, that's a nice point, but why do you need your 360 to soullessly tell you that you did it and give you a litel numbars for it? if you've put in the effort to Become the Badass, you should be aware of what you did, and what it means to you.



and i don't have a ps3, but i wouldn't care for the trophies either. i guess i'm just not a GAMERRR anymore. i dunno. i only seem to like STG, and mostly just to get good at them.

I agree with Damocles and others that they're best when they encourage a different play style.

if, for instance, i were playing some badass game like chaos legion or devil may fry or god hand (i've had god hand for like a year or something and i've still never played it, i should seriously do that, shouldn't i. and finish DMC3. shit), i'd rather the game be designed to get me to play differently. for instance, if there were an achievement for killing a certain boss with just your guns in DMC, why not, instead, make the boss vulnerable to your guns and add a second form so as not to reduce any challenge (and make a cooler boss fight)?

can you guys maybe give me some examples of ACHAVE MINTS that you thought were especially good?

[cools]

I like the ones that force you to play in a way you wouldn't normally think of.

Such as Geometry Wars Pacifism (survive but don't kill anything for 2 minutes IIRC), and Trials HD Unyielding (don't lean - throttle and brakes only). These type of achievements interest me in the brief times when I've had access to a 360.

Anything that would be performed during normal play - 1CC, killing a specific enemy, firing a weapon - is pointless.

[Ed Oscuro]

i really, really dislike the name. that may even be what i hate most about it. "achievements". you haven't achieved shit. try overthrowing a dictator or something.

videya gaems iz srsi buzines

Nice blend of grammar nazism and fun hating in that post btw. 7.9 on the Rabid Scale.

[sven666]

i do not care at all.

ive had a ps3 since japanese launch, havent connected it to the internets even once.

[steveovig]

I like them a ton! I only have a PS3 but I feel more compelled to play some games longer than I would normally, because of the trophies. Take for instance, Sonic Unleashed. It's not a masterpiece but because of the trophies it made me play longer and I ended up appreciating the game a little longer. Also, I like the social aspect of trophies and being able to track my friend's lists, etc. I find that fun!

[Elixir]

This is probably going to sound weird coming from me, but; achievements/trophies/whatever are very good as they induce replay value into any game which has them. This means you're getting more value for money, and a better game. I do agree that there should be some way of hiding them entirely, though. Not just the ability to hide them from other people seeing what you've played, but hide them from your own view as well. Same goes for "avatars".

Achievements existed before the 360 and PS3--these were called "goals", such as 1ccing a shmup, which was practice on this forum way long before the console came along. People seem to dislike achievements because they don't like their "goals" laid out for them, rather that they prefer to make their own.

As for myself, I only try to 100% games that I actively enjoy, such as Resonance Of Fate or Earth Defense Force 2017.

[Snake]

I used to shoot for achievements/trophies, until I finished a few long grinding ones and it struck me that I was totally wasting my time. It's an artificial way to lengthen playing time without improving the size or quality of a game.

[Ganelon]

Most folks I know care about them enough to take out an quick and easy one if they have time. I think they're good for giving folks who crave replay more stuff to do. But for many games, having more achievements doesn't even indicate the player is good at all (i.e. any fighter).

I don't bother with achievements/trophies at all, even if it takes just 5 minutes. But I don't avoid them either. I just need a reward for accomplishing something. Meaningless points and a silly icon don't cut it. If the game unlocked something special for clearing goals, I'd be much more interested. And that's why I immediately aim for in-game unlockables. Same concept, sure, but it's the ends that matter.

[sjewkestheloon]

I like them a lot. I don't give a damn about my overall gamerscore but I like working towards certain achievements or 1000/1000 targets.

In previous generations I used to often buy games, play them once and then trade them in. Now I find myself only buying games that I will want to play through many times and I often make a new playthrough to aim for specific achievements.

As for examples of games with achievements that I liked, I'd go for Mass Effect, as it encouraged me to play through the game many times with each of the different character classes and with every single secondary character. It also gives you ingame stat boosts and rewards for most of them.

I also don't mind grindy achievements as I find grinding theraputic. I will get the Star Ocean:TLH 1000/1000 one day.

[yojo!]

The only achievement I always go after is: finish the game on 1 credit.

[kengou]

I generally don't care at all about achievements on Steam or my PS3. There just isn't any point to them. If I'm really bored and feel like replaying a game I like, I might take a look at them for any fun ones to do, but generally there aren't. The only exception was Team Fortress 2's unlock system based on achievements. I had to care about achievements, and I HATED that system with a passion because of it.

[DEL]

Are these achievements like peanut rewards for birds and monkeys who can figure out how to work the nut dispenser?

If so, this sounds like the meaningless level ups in a never ending game of WoW.
The old 'hamsters on a treadmill' thing.

So, if this is the type of thing you're referring to....no. Not me.

As opposed to real 1CC completions which are real goals.
You have to have goals. Just meaningful ones.

[TLB]

i really, really dislike the name. that may even be what i hate most about it. "achievements". you haven't achieved shit. try overthrowing a dictator or something.

videya gaems iz srsi buzines

Nice blend of grammar nazism and fun hating in that post btw. 7.9 on the Rabid Scale.

[Ed Oscuro]

Haha, that makes me chuckle as well.

Are these achievements like peanut rewards for birds and monkeys who can figure out how to work the nut dispenser?

If so, this sounds like the meaningless level ups in a never ending game of WoW.
The old 'hamsters on a treadmill' thing.

So, if this is the type of thing you're referring to....no. Not me.

As opposed to real 1CC completions which are real goals.
You have to have goals. Just meaningful ones.

Maybe you didn't read my post, so I'll try again.

Yes, some Achievements / Trophies / etc. are just as you described. But not all.

In many games where 1CC methods don't apply (anybody remember the old RPG "Iron Man" challenge? Waste of time quite often) the Achievements are a way of letting the player set little goals and work on them. I appreciate this a lot in games that otherwise can become monotonous. Even though it's "artificial," it's a way of letting the player challenge themselves in a way they normally wouldn't to play the game different. I don't say this lets a game, where there is just one way to play, off the hook for being lame, but it doesn't hurt either. An example is Team Fortress 2: For many players, simply trying to play the game with the only goal being winning is a bit too mindless, so the Achievements help break up the pace and add an unpredictable element - people might not act just as you expect because they too are trying to do something unconventional.

[Ruldra]

Funny you mention TF2; I heard it has some really awful archievements.

This was a major problem in MAG (256-player FPS); there were so many different ribbons and medals to get, people would often do their own thing and forget to play as a team and win the fight, which should be the main goal.

Even worse, players had no problems stabbing their teammates on the back to blow up an objective and get a ribbon. Cue 5 people reaching an objective, then they all start killing each other and the survivor starts planting the charge, only to get killed by a single guy on the other team...nice job guys. This crap was ruining the game.

The developers had to severely tone down the archievements to make them much easier to get. It was the only way to make players forget about the damn ribbons and actually work as a team.

Some people are too caught up on archievements these days.

[Ed Oscuro]

TF2 does have some awful ones, but some good ones as well. I don't play anymore (haven't since the Scout update), but it's a model to look at when it's good.

About MAG, that sounds poorly executed. Battlefield 2 has a similar system but it's more cooperative as it should be. The worst that usually happened there was people killing teammates to get into certain vehicles...which had nothing to do with ranks or medals.

[KindGrind]

I confess I used to be an achievement whore, but I just don't have time for it anymore. I still really like the system as a whole, quite addictive. Adds lots of replay value to the game, as Elixir pointed out.

[Daigohji]

It really depends on how well conceived the achievements are. The worst kind are easter egg hunts where you have to hunt down hundreds of items hidden all over the game, as those are the laziest way to extend play time. The first Assassin's Creed had a bunch of shitty achievements like this.

The best achievements are the ones that encourage you to explore the nuances of the games mechanics or play in a way you wouldn't normally think of. Project Gotham Racing 4 has some excellent achievements. One that comes to mind involves beating a time trial on a particular track without using the brakes. For a game that normally straddles the line between arcade racer and sim, this challenge requires more thought about your racing line, shifting weight and precision use of the accelerator.

Another good one is the one gun achievement in Dead Space. The game lets you carry over weapons and upgrades to subsequent playthroughs, which is fun, but there's less tension when you have a huge arsenal from the outset. Having to go through the whole game using only the plasma cutter brings the tension right back.

[TaygetaVendetta]

I believe achievements are one of the best ideas Microsoft has contributed to gaming, I really get a lot out of them. As previously stated by a few people they really add more value to your purchase, especially if its a solid achievement list. I've been in to them since I initially got my 360 and try to get all the achievements for the games I own. I refuse to sell a game before I've gotten all of it's achievements.

The ones I enjoy most have a specific goal in mind that you wouldn't otherwise think/strive to do. IE beating one of Left 4 Dead's finales without anyone on your team taking damage. Working cooperatively toward that insane requirement was, while frustrating initially, great fun and incredibly satisfying, with much hooting and hollering from all my friends as we raced toward the finish line to get the achievement.

The negative side to them is that shitty achievement lists have dissuaded me from playing games I would be otherwise interested in playing. For example a vast majority of JRPGs, nearly every one that I can think of in fact, has an awful achievement list that has absurd amounts of grinding and doing repetitive, monotonous, brain-melting tasks like getting every item in the game or some horseshit like that. Achievements, combined with jadedness stemming from lack of innovation/change after playing many on the PS2, basically turned me off of a genre I used to enjoy quite a bit. I do think Nier and Resonance of Fate both look astounding and may pick them both up when they drop to $20, in spite of their insane tasks for 100% of their achievements. The only JRPG with a good list that I can think of is Enchanted Arms. You got them all by the time you finished the story, you weren't forced to do any tedious crap you otherwise wouldn't want to do that would detract from the main experience of the game.

A majority of people on my friendslist are into achievements and we play metagames with one another based on achievements ("I can finish game "X" before you finish game "Y", who can knock out the most difficult achievements in a game or a group of us starting a game at the same time and seeing who can finish it first). Being able to brag about your accomplishments with a system in place to show you've done can also give others motivation to match your tasks. A friend of mine who is honestly better at me in shmups (with that said neither of us is any good at them by this board's standards), wrote himself off not being able to do Ultra Arrange mode in Mushi 1.5, but me having the achievement for doing it kind of drove him insane to the point where he buckled down and finally did it after a few days of consistent practice.


Trophies OTOH I could give two shits about. The lack of standardization about them makes me not care. IE one game has them, the other doesn't. I think I have like 3 total, all from Söldner-X.

[Blade]

Well, for PS3, it's a tad different:

Some trophies unlock stuff for you, so it improves your game a little. Others are gimmies (morale boost I guess when playing).

Most trophies I have are fighting game related, so usually it's something like pulling off an 80-hit combo or something, or beating a certain uber tough boss, or reaching a certain level of Online Play.

Anyone who gets Platinum Trophy in BlazBlue Calamity Trigger, and BlazBlue Continuum Shift, definitely needs props for that, especially the latter since you need to learn over 50 different combos (100 Challenge Missions), which takes a bit of effort.

There are some tricky hidden ones...like in Batman: Arkham Asylum, catching your own Batarang, hehe, that one's fun.