Topic: A Nintendo Argument Against Achievements

Achievements are clearly a controversial aspect of gaming within the community, plenty of people have positive things to say about them and likewise plenty of people have negative things to say about them. But most of the time the assumption is that achievements are forced upon us.
I'm personally pro-achievements but I can fully understand why other people are against achievements. I however can't understand why making achievements optional isn't often brought up, surely that would be a solution to most of the problems? If you could choose personal achievement settings on the console which then limits whether to show you all/select/none achievements within each game, I can't see much of a problem with that as it could potentially make both parties happy.
Although I'm more than willing to be enlightened I thought I'd throw my two cents in.

@Var
I like the optional achievements idea a lot. This could be the best solution.

It comes down to basic psychology. If you start giving someone cash for something they were originally doing for free as a hobby because they loved it, they'll stop enjoying it as much. If you get a job, doing something you previously did as a hobby, you won't enjoy it as much, because you'll believe you're doing it for the money, instead of previously, when your main motivation was enjoyment.

Same with games. Achievements are like $$ to people. It's an external reward for something they originally found intrinsically rewarding. That's why you hear all these stories about people playing the games for achievements but not enjoying them. They're playing for payment, not for fun. It is like a job in a way.

I don't mind if achievements are somewhat tied to in game rewards. Sort of like Metroid Prime, where you got credits for beating bosses or getting a certain percentage of items/scans. This could lead to an online backloggery type thing where you and your friends could see if you've beaten/what percentage you have on certain games. I'd like that a lot, and many Nintendo games now have "achievements" in them already - stars in Mario Galaxy, Medals in Kirby's Epic Yarn, Collectibles like KONG letters in DKC. If you could display those online I'd not have a problem with that. It's the silly achievements, or "achievements for acheivement's sake" that I'd rather not see.

Achievements are optional. Just ignore them if you don't like them.

I'm against achievements. I think they're a lazy, artificial way for developers to lengthen their game without adding content. Your reward for achieving the often-random challenge that friends would likely make amongst themselves is a simple numbers boost. Statistics that are meaningless, unless you have an interest in impressing other people who see your profile or other personal reasons you may have (which I applaud if you feel driven to it).

On the other hand: Bonus levels, ultra rare weapons/armor, better endings... Now those are TRUE rewards for game mastery. Rewards actually related to the game you're playing, as opposed to numbers and stats on your home screen.

I'm almost obsessive/compulsive about doing all I can in a game. And yet achievements feel so unimportant to me, I can't bring myself to break a sweat over them. If I happen to get one, yeah for me! If not, oh well! One day, when I've really got my game on, I'm going to take up the challenge of finishing Final Fantasy IX under the allotted time, so I can wield Excalibur II! If I only got points or a trophy for that feat, I wouldn't even bother thinking of doing it.

I salute Nintendo for not caving in to this boring, superficial trend that does nothing to actually improve a game. What's the point? Points?

I'd rather Nintendo have gone for the "opt out" model rather than the "we'll tell you how you should enjoy your games" model.

Achievments are a feature. That same feature doesn't hurt people that don't like them, but some people like them. Nintendo's giving those people the finger.

What do we call Club Nintendo?

Nintendo tends to look at gaming in such a philosophical manner. While it is always great to find leaders of an industry putting the thought into every aspect of their creation to question the necessity of certain fragments and the absence of others, it can get rather irritating to some people who differ in opinion with good 'ol Ninty. I dont find achievements to be necessary, but I do find them to be nice addition in certain games. But nonetheless, its their product and their decision, and I will refrain from complaining. After all, Nintendo always delivers in making truly charming, compelling, and memorable experiences and should be accredited for doing so. And as long as they continue, they have a clear grasp into the shallow waters of my wallet and may take ceaselessly once the 3DS releases. And I have no doubt, they will deliver.

Since when did you (or Nintendo) have the right to tell people what they should find is, or isn't pointless?

Long term, having the arrogance to think it can dictate to the market how a product should be experienced hurts companies. Microsoft tried it, it failed. Microsoft has since had to backtrack.

See, with statements like this you're passing your opinion off as some accepted truth.

taking that from the 'since when did Nintendo...' standpoint, i'd have to say maybe since they're the ones making the game system, they get to make the rules. they might change their minds later, but for right now it seems they've made their decision.

Achievement good, but achievement also bad.

that about sums it up, really, as we've got people firmly planted on both sides of the fence.

long story short, this thread is heading into the same circular pattern of arguing as the other three achievement-based threads we've had on the forums since August. If y'all want to keep wrangling with one another over it, take it to the main site article thread regarding this particular development, but remember -- and i'm looking at you, WaveBoy -- please keep it civil.