Achievements, I hope they go away next generation

[Something Amyss]

1) They are worthless but they take away freedoms like external cheat devices. So the trade off is bad.

2) I am talking about external cheats and not all games offer cheats

3) Starcraft 2...No achievements while offline. http://www.gosugamers.net/starcraft2/news/12614-no-achievements-while-offline

1. only if you ascribe value to them, otherwise, they cannot be a bargaining chop.

2. Which game companies were fighting before achievements and will fight even if they magically disappear tomorrow.

3. So don't play for achievements? Didn't you just call them worthless?

 

[lacktheknack]

I think they are worthless but even worse, they are used as justification to take away player freedoms like cheat devices and/or offline play.

What say you?

1. "Achievements are worthless"...This one always kinda cracks me up. What exactly are you expecting to gain from playing a game without achievements? It's not like you beat a game and someone hands you a goddamn paycheck. You get achievements for the same reason you play games at all...FUN.

2. "They take away cheats"...It's easy to have cheat modes that disable achievements, games have been doing it for years. And if you don't care about achievements, that shouldn't be a problem.

3. "They take away offline play"....Um....How?

I think anyone who has a problem with achievements is provably (see above) talking out of their ass.

1) They are worthless but they take away freedoms like external cheat devices. So the trade off is bad.

2) I am talking about external cheats and not all games offer cheats

3) Starcraft 2...No achievements while offline. http://www.gosugamers.net/starcraft2/news/12614-no-achievements-while-offline

You're still contradicting yourself. They don't take away from offline play because they're worthless! ...Unless they aren't! Make up your mind.

 

[Lunar Templar]

Eh, I'm OK with them. Just let people have an option to turn the alerts off and they're fine.

-.- if you need a cheat device to get an achievement, you don't deserve it.

That wasn't his point. He meant that the prescence of achievements often removes/hinders the ability to cheat (read: StarCraft 2).

-.- if you need a cheat device to get an achievement, you don't deserve it.

I don't think that was the point. I think the barring of cheat devices for personal use and decline of in-game cheats is more the issue.

i kinda just gotta say "so? man the fuck up -.-" to that. losing cheat devices is hardly worth getting up in arms about, with the other crap game company's ARE pulling, like the online passes, the various forms of DRM that just get in the way and waste my time.

I don't want achievements at all and I'd like the freedom to cheat if I feel like it. In game cheats are fine but not all games have them. I grew up playing with the Game Genie on the NES/SNES/Genesis and I have cheat devices for the Gamecube, DS and PS2. I used them for fun and sometimes they are a backup if you just get stuck.

so did i, thing is, i got over not having said devices (that don't always work and can delete your saves) we seem to be moving away from them, and as stated above there better things we, as a gaming community, could be rallying around then the loss of the action replay -.-

 

[Farther than stars]

Eh, I like some of them. Sure, the ones which you get automatically for going through the story campaign don't add much value other than the developers being able to pawn off some of their phony titles in the corner of the screen, but the ones that make you go "how the hell do I do that?" do give you a real sense of achievement if you then do figure it out. Take some of the Portal achievements as an example of that.

 

[Fasckira]

I hate achievements that you get for just doing things like playing through the first chapter or something. I do however love the ones that you get for doing random or difficult actions because then its essentially a nod, "Hey, you just managed that - nice going!"

Its like having a high-five from your imaginary friend.

 

[Smooth Operator]

I want them to grow into something meaningful, give me XP, gold, guns, upgrades, skins,... something for them and then I will start to care.

The current systems are just meaningless horseshit.

 

[Epona]

"I don't like achievements, and since my opinion > the ones of the people that do like achievements, it must go."

I cannot understand how so many gamers justify being this entitled.

I said "hope", not "must". However, if you feel that: My opinion < the ones of people who do like achievements then aren't those people being entitled too? Your logic, not mine.

You know, having an opinion about something doesn't make one an entitled brat.

 

[getoffmycloud]

If there done properly they are brilliant. some of most fun I have had this console generation was trying to complete mirrors edge without shooting anyone I would have never done that without achievements. Also lots of the stuff from open world games I would probably never do without achievements if they are obscure and stupid enough that you wouldn't think about it without achievements. But I do agree achievements for level completion suck there should be ones for completing the story but that's it.

 

[ShindoL Shill]

but cheats bore me. they were fine when i was shit, but now theyre useless to me. and they dont take away offline play.
and achievements let me remember the cool shit i did.

When you use the built in cheat codes for a game, say Half-Life 2 or Starcraft 2, doesn't that disable Achievements? Makes sense but that is also why external cheat devices and trainers aren't allowed anymore (did you even look up the Starcraft 2 controversy). There is correlation.

but he said correlation=/=causation. people found a correlation between cell phones and cancer, doesnt mean one causes the other.
the reason achievements get turned off is because its not an achievement if you cheat.

 

[RaikuFA]

this is how i feel about them. there is a lot of harsh languige so dont say i didnt warn you if youre watching this at work or something:

 

[Brandon237]

Eh, I'm OK with them. Just let people have an option to turn the alerts off and they're fine.

-.- if you need a cheat device to get an achievement, you don't deserve it.

That wasn't his point. He meant that the prescence of achievements often removes/hinders the ability to cheat (read: StarCraft 2).

That was a game I wanted to try cheating against the AI with for shits and giggles so badly, but it would jeopardise my only account for the game

Offline play needs to be reintroduced (it is almost dead, so maybe just resuscitated) , and on certain profiles you should be allowed to have a single-player cheat-filled game, where you choose when creating this second profile to deactivate achievements.

I like this idea.

 

[Epona]

but cheats bore me. they were fine when i was shit, but now theyre useless to me. and they dont take away offline play.
and achievements let me remember the cool shit i did.

When you use the built in cheat codes for a game, say Half-Life 2 or Starcraft 2, doesn't that disable Achievements? Makes sense but that is also why external cheat devices and trainers aren't allowed anymore (did you even look up the Starcraft 2 controversy). There is correlation.

but he said correlation=/=causation. people found a correlation between cell phones and cancer, doesnt mean one causes the other.
the reason achievements get turned off is because its not an achievement if you cheat.

So there is correlation.

When you cheat with in game cheats, the achievements are turned off which makes sense. It also means that a cheat system that can't be detected can abuse the achievement system. Now, I don't care about achievements and I prefer to not have them and have the freedom to cheat instead. Opinions will vary and I understand that but the point is that there absolutely is a correlation between achievements and the freedom to cheat using an external device/software.

Also, when Blizzard disabled Achievements in Starcraft 2 when you are not online that showed a correlation between online play and achievements. In Diablo III you don't even get the offline play choice at all and I believe achievements and their Banner system play a role in that considering how they treated offline achievements in Starcraft 2.

 

[Father Tunde]

I think they are worthless but even worse, they are used as justification to take away player freedoms like cheat devices and/or offline play.

What say you?

If anything, the encourage more Offline play. That way the Achievement/Trophy hunters will play the single player to unlock their respective achievements.

Also, what is this cardinal sin of online gaming. It's just gaming evolving into something different, just like it's been doing for years, and will do for many more.

 

[Frozen Donkey Wheel2]

I think they are worthless but even worse, they are used as justification to take away player freedoms like cheat devices and/or offline play.

What say you?

1. "Achievements are worthless"...This one always kinda cracks me up. What exactly are you expecting to gain from playing a game without achievements? It's not like you beat a game and someone hands you a goddamn paycheck. You get achievements for the same reason you play games at all...FUN.

2. "They take away cheats"...It's easy to have cheat modes that disable achievements, games have been doing it for years. And if you don't care about achievements, that shouldn't be a problem.

3. "They take away offline play"....Um....How?

I think anyone who has a problem with achievements is provably (see above) talking out of their ass.

1) They are worthless but they take away freedoms like external cheat devices. So the trade off is bad.

2) I am talking about external cheats and not all games offer cheats

3) Starcraft 2...No achievements while offline. http://www.gosugamers.net/starcraft2/news/12614-no-achievements-while-offline

Well, I never used external cheat devices, but the fact is that achievements and cheats are not mutually exclusive. All games could theoretically have cheat modes that disable achievements. It's the fault of the developers, not achievements.

As for your third point...So what? Isn't not having achievements EXACTLY what you want in the first place?

 

[DanielBrown]

Pfft, I'm sure achievements are part of the reason why games sell so well. Just think of all the achivement/trophy junkies out there that buy games just for adding to their game score!

Over half of my games are ones I just bought because they were cheap and I wanted trophies, not because I really wanted the game.

 

[Michael Hirst]

I've never been very impressed with achievements overall but in the end it comes down to me just blatantly disregarding them. Getting rid of them wouldn't really change anything for me because I don't pay attention to them unless there's a game with something slightly interesting ala Pacifism in Deus Ex 3.

Keep them around for the people who are motivated by them and the people who don't like them well...deal with it they don't actually take anything out the game.

 

[Epona]

I think they are worthless but even worse, they are used as justification to take away player freedoms like cheat devices and/or offline play.

What say you?

If anything, the encourage more Offline play. That way the Achievement/Trophy hunters will play the single player to unlock their respective achievements.

Also, what is this cardinal sin of online gaming. It's just gaming evolving into something different, just like it's been doing for years, and will do for many more.

Single player games don't need to be online and the only reason they are is so the publishers can keep an eye on you.

 

[Brutal Peanut]

Not all achievements need to go...

"Achievement unlocked! - Complete the tutorial"

Shit like that HAS to leave though.

Took the words right out of my....fingers...or whatever.