Topic: A Nintendo Argument Against Achievements

http://kotaku.com/5740114/a-nintendo-argument-against-achieve...

"We're not opposed to Achievements," Nintendo's Bill Trinen told me earlier this week, even as he confirmed that his company's next system, the 3DS, won't have one of the more popular features in Xbox 360, PlayStation 3 and PC gaming.

Perhaps Nintendo has found a trend worth bucking.

Since the launch of the Xbox 360, gamers and game creators have appeared to collectively, if not unanimously, embrace the idea of associating certain actions in a video game with some sort of accolade or point value that can be added to accolades and points earned in other games in order to represent a player's overall accomplishments. Since Microsoft started doling out Achievement points on the Xbox 360, PC gamers have been able to do something similar with Steam Achievements, PlayStation users with Trophies and iPhone users with Game Center Achievements.

Nintendo has been the outlier, offering an Achievement-like system in its 2008 game Wii Sports Resort but declining to implement anything system-wide or even make the practice common in its games. Mario games don't have Achievements. Zelda games don't. Just about nothing Nintendo makes does including the Nintendo 3DS, which is Nintendo's big hardware release, coming to America on March 27.

"When they create their games, [Nintendo's designers] don't tell you how to play their game in order to achieve some kind of mythical reward.""When they create their games, [Nintendo's designers] don't tell you how to play their game in order to achieve some kind of mythical reward," Trinen said, explaining his view of why Nintendo's top creators have stayed off the Achievement bandwagon. Trinen is currently head of product marketing for Nintendo of America, but has also long communicated with Nintendo's top development talent in Japan and would be privy to their design philosophies.

"Basically, the way the games are designed is they're designed for you to explore the game yourself and have this sense of discovery," he said. "To that end, I think that when you look specifically at games from EAD [the group long led by Mario and Donkey Kong creator Shigeru Miyamoto] and a lot of other games that Nintendo has developed a well, there are things you can do in the game that will result in some sort of reward or unexpected surprise. In my mind, that really encourages the sense of exploration rather than the sense of 'If I do that, I'm going to get some sort of artificial point or score that's going to make me feel better that I got this.' And that, to me, is I think more compelling."

Trinen is aware of Nintendo's own exceptions. He recalled an Achievement-like bonus system in the GameCube's Super Smash Bros. Melee that rewarded players for doing specific, sometimes-unusual, things in the game. But he pointed out that even that game didn't tell its players in advance that they would be getting rewards and how to attain them.

Achievement-skepticism is not a Nintendo-exclusive philosophy. Plenty of other people have wondered what the worth of Achievements is, how they affect the way we play games that contain them and, ultimately whether they are good or bad for games and gaming.

It's not clear if Nintendo's top people would go as far as saying that Achievements are bad for video games, but Trinen articulates a valid wariness about what their cost may be. It's hard to imagine a Zelda game that contains Achievements. It's harder still to imagine one that feels as magical and surprising as the best of them do.

I like them. They keep me playing a game longer than I would do without them. They make me do things that I would normally not see a point doing. And then when they're achieved, I don't need to do them again.

Play 500 matches online in Street Fighter IV? I wouldn't even reach 100 if it wasn't for the achievement.

Win twenty matches online with every character in Super Street Fighter IV? There are some characters I would never use online without the achievement.

I like them, when they involve something that does not occur in the single-player aspect of the game.

If I get an achievement for beating a level, no thank. If I get an achievement for say, 1,000,000 on a level or a speed run, sure, I'll take it.

We've had this discussion many times before, and I'll reiterate: I don't care for them. Most of the time they are stupid things like "completed tutorial" or "fired 2000 bullets". Who cares?

Achievement:
There not the reason why we play games.

I don't need a Dog Treat for every mind-less task I do in a game.
Only if achievement were worth something, but there not.
A Game should make you come back for more because it was Fun, not because "If I brush my little pony 100 Times for 10 points".
Video Games should be enjoy, not feel like work.

Now if you excuse me, I got to play "Happy Pony Rainbow land" because those Pony are not going to brush them selfs for gamerscore.

Personally, I'm on the same mind-set as Jonathan Blow on this one. If you don't know where he stands, his thoughts are nicely summed up in this article. Essentially, Jonathan Blow says that achievements could (and probably already) make games less fun and program us into playing them because we get X amount of gamerpoints/trophy points/whatever for sticking with them until the end.

Fun with some games but that's when the game is design with them in mind. Not an add on at the end, randomly tossed in, which is what achievements feel are like to me.
Bass you played that much online just for an achievement instead of just... because you enjoy it?A lot of times you get in that mode where you are not even thinking much anymore while doing a specific achievement. (Like repetitive ones).

Like unlocking a DK stage in Brawl, you had to play 20 times with him. All I did was kept choosing DK and killing myself. It did program me to get an X amount of w.e.Though by talking like this, it could be said about a lot of unlockables. So yeah inb4 what I said!

I've got a ps3, & while I do like trophies (achievements) I have noticed that I have not bought games that I know I'd enjoy simply because they didn't have trophies in them. I have 1 friend on there that is, as he calls himself, a trophy whore, & he absolutely won't get off whatever game he's playing to play with us until he's gotten every trophy. He's even bought some of the worst games ever made, simply because they have some of the easiest trophies to get.

I almost can't remember playing a game simply because I liked the game & had fun playing it, now it's all about getting tophies that actually do nothing for you at all.

I think achievements and trophies would be nice. It would probably make me play the game more - if I enjoy it, of course. There's no way I'd buy some horrible games just to get easy trophies.

Personally I like achievements and see them as an evolution of the high score tables of old.Its nice to be able to see what your friends are playing and what they have done in a game (also they can't lie about completing a game that they haven't ).I think when done correctly they add replay value and can add some nice extra challenges that I probably would never have thought of doing.I do think it would be nice if the points you earn could be 'cashed in' for downloadable bonus content and such like but I can't see it happening.
I agree that people who play crappy games just for points are stupid but its their choice at the end of the day.
I hope Nintendo embraces the idea with the 3DS and Wii2 and for people that don't like em, they can be ignored/turned off you know!

I prefer doing things for myself in games or to get unlockables, not because I'll get points that do absolutely nothing for it.

I like achievements. Most of the time, I just play through a game, just wanting to take in the main story. Achievements encourage me to explore every facet, do my best in every aspect (ooh a rhyme!) They keep me playing longer and earning them all (jk, that never happens) gives more content and even replay to a game. Yes, sometimes games do them badly, but you can say that about any gaming feature. I'd like to see Nintendo try it at some point.

I'm not a massive fan of achievements...but achievement-style rewards are great! It's those ridiculous side-quests in zelda like the great fairy sword/pieces of heart/gold skulltulas/biggoron's sword which are a reward in themselves that keep me playing, not an 'Achievement unlocked' pop up. NSMBW gives you more levels for collecting the star coins - miles better than a virtual badge!

That said MP3:Corruption did have achievement style things, but they bought you bonus goodies...

I prefer these things to more or less meaningless achievements anyway - grinding for '100000000000 kills is never fun...

I thought this was talked about before. We can revive this thread here for talking about achievements.

https://www.nintendolife.com/forums/general_discussion/achieve...

I don't aim for achievments, nor do they keep me playing for longer, but I guess there good to have just to show players that.... they did well?

Sometimes achievements can be fun. Like encouraging you to climb to the gighest story and land on top of an enemy (greatest achievement evar!)

Nintendo doesn't want to keep you playing longer! They just want you to buy their new game!

What game was that from?

If I'm not mistaken, which I probably am, it was in Call of Duty 4.

BUT BUT Ninty does do achievements, I guess SSBB never happened with the 545 Trophies or MP3C or collection treasures in Wario Land or the Blitties in MAL RPG3 or catching each Pokemon is sorta an achievement. oh and lets not forget recent DKCR Puzzles

@Otaku They are player-set achievments though, whereas on the Xbox or PS3, they are pre-made for the game.