Topic: Is 100% Completion Really that Important?

@KirbyTheVampire True gaming and OCD go hand in hand

I try to 100% games sometimes, but it rarely happens unless it's relatively easy to do so. Even for Zelda games, which are generally really good games to 100%, I technically haven't 100% a single one. Wind Waker HD is literally because of a single figure (yes I almost did all of the Nintendo Gallery, I don't know why). And also ALBW has a dumb multiplayer-like thing I didn't do anything with.

If you love the game. If the game is one of your desert island discs. Then 100%ing a game sometimes feels like closure. So you can move on with another game...until the nostalgia hits of course lol.

@kkslider5552000: I recently finished A Link Between Worlds, and for the most part I've achieved 100% completion on the normal mode (I'll return for Hero Mode another time). The only two things that I haven't done are the Streetpass multiplayer (I live in the middle of nowhere) and the endless mode of the Cucco challenge (didn't find it worth the time and frustration, plus there's no legit reward). According to some, the Cucco thing isn't necessary for 100% completion.

That's another interesting point: Some gamers disagree on how completion works for some games. It really is, ultimately, up to the restrictions a player places upon themselves.

I play games to have fun. I may do extras if I'm truly enjoying myself and find them rewarding, but I'm not going to kill myself by trying to 100% everything on the hardest mode possible.

In Donkey Kong Country Returns it was even possible to get 200% without doing one chalenge (Time trials). That's what I did, I love the game and I felt like I was able to get 200% so I tried it but I have to say it was not completely worth it, it was much more fun to get to 100% than the rest. It is also more fun to replay my favourite stages just for fun than getting 200% but I did it. At least I can say I did, but that's the best thing about it and it is not enough important for me, I would not do it again. But Time trials were just too ridiculously difficult, I never even seriously tried to beat the first stage's one. I just tried it to see what it was like and dismissed it immediately. I don't know if I can say I have done 100% even if the game says I got 200% but I don't care. I love that game but if I will play it again (I hope so on Switch) I will just stop at "100%" and be happy with that

I've been wrong for so many years! I was blind but now I see!

@Zyrac Many NES games were tough in unfair ways but they'd very rarely require you to know techniques to seemingly break the game just in order to finish the game. Like in Mario World you can jump off Yoshi mid-air to gain additional height to reach places that the level design assumes you won't be able to get to. It's helpful sometimes to avoid losing a life and many Kaizo Mario levels are built around the idea but (as far as I can remember) it's never actually required in a real Mario World level and certainly not required to get through all of the main worlds to beat Bowser.

Later on Shantae and the Pirates Curse (and I assume the other games as well) requires you to use the equivalent level techniques just to beat the game.

That's an aside from the debate on 100% completion though. I completely agree that it adds something to many games to know that "there are X collectables in this level and X stamps and X stars" because it gives you a reason to replay levels repeatedly in a world where you have save games and basically unlimited lives and where game design is no longer as reliant on pattern memorisation. But I do wonder if part of the popularity of games like Spelunky and the Binding of Issac is that those games don't allow that type of certainty going in. They remain inherently mysterious and full of secrets that you might never find (or even know exist).

Real gamers only buy rare downloads.

I don't mind having informations about the quantity of bonuses and hidden secrets a stage has, but I prefer when the amount is not fixed and exactly equal in every stage. It makes stages feel less spontaneous and more artificial somehow. I like the feeling of being immersed in the game's world both in games with a more serious and realistic tone and in games with a more fun/cartoonish/childish tone, so even in a colourful platformer like Donkey Kong Country Returns it would be better for me to keep stages more varied even in the quantity of bonuses and secrets they have, it would make them (and the whole game world) feel more natural and immersive.

@StuTwo I can't think of anything in Shantae I would describe as "seemingly breaking the game". You do bring up a difference in design philosophy: Super Mario World has some very lenient level design (so lenient, in fact, that you can fly over half the levels). Of course, part of the reason for this is that you're not guaranteed to have Yoshi or the cape at any given point, so the levels have to be beatable without them. In Shantae, the developers know you'll have certain abilities after certain points, so the levels are built to make full use of them. There's nothing wrong with that.

@LuckyLand If nothing else, it probably helps level design if developers don't force themselves to put exactly X trinkets in every stage.

If you have achievements I say it's definitely worth it.

Nintendo not having any is annoying

I have never been into 100%ing a game. I do it on games I really like but I play way too much to get side tracked by getting every little thing. It is nice for games I come back to later as it gives me something else to do though. But bragging rights mean very little to me.

100% is only worthwhile in games where it isn't obnoxious or overly tedious to do every single thing in the game.

Even most Zelda games have at least one bit of side content that falls too much into either problem, and I tend to consider Zelda a good example of enjoyable 100% completion. I remember in 2011 or so I tried to 100% both Arkham City and Assassin's Creed Revelations (barring multiplayer stuff I was unable to access because reasons). I failed to do so despite trying way too hard to do so. Especially with Achivements in those games.

Tbh, nearly every game I've enjoyed 100% are fairly linear and pretty easy.

@subpopz
I like achievements because they tie all your games together, making gaming feel a LITTLE less of a waste of time because it all contributes to one record of what you've done. It's also nice to be able to see how much value you've got out of a game based on the percentage completion of the trophies (where a lot of games don't tell you your in-game completion percentage). Achievements have also pushed me to replay games multiple times, see things I didn't even know were in the game, see the story from different perspectives with different endings or extra scenes and world building collectibles etc, and play the game in a totally different way (like extra hard or survival mode). There's a lot more to achievements than just a score and bragging rights.

I almost never 100% games. I play 100% of the content in the game I want to play. I see little to no point in collecting all 900 of random X collectible that benefits you in no way. That said, I like having the option to. I like knowing that, if I wanted, there are things I could do.

I like to obtain 100% when possible but not if it stops being fun and becomes too much of a chore. I completed Zelda and felt I'd done a massive amount of content in my 90 hours playtime. After defeating Gannon I checked my completion rate and it sat at 18%. I think the majority of the percentage comes from the little seeds you collect. I got loads of them but apparently there is 900 of them. I might go back now and then to have a look around but I'll never get 100% and I don't see the point in using guides. Disgaea 5 also seems like a game that no matter how long I play I'll never see everything. I just do my best until I've completed the game and mop up what I can maybe revisiting every now and then.

I can say this, I find that the games that sustain interest on the path to 100% are a cut above the rest. For one, that’s a sign that each indiviual task that composes a game is actually something worth doing on its own.

It used to be a resonable thing to do. I 100 % completed the PS1 game Medievil, the N64 games Super Mario 64 and Ocarina of Time, which just meant doing and seeing everything in the game.

Now it means things like collecting 900 korok seeds, to which I say hell no. The worst game in this respect I've ever played was Final Fantasy 13, which would require you to get one of every weapon in the game, then level up every single weapon to it's max level, then you got the last trophy.

DK64 was a cautionary tale on where not to go.

Breath of the Wild would have been perfect if it had no korok seeds, and no fairy fountains.

Pretty much, this is how I am towards the topic of 100% completing games. When it loses its fun, or becomes boring, then it's time to stop for a while.

I thoroughly enjoy playing games. Since I don't have a whole lot of free time, or money, on my hands, I try to purposely play games slowly, & not complete them right away. During individual play session, I'll also play a game until I I get a little tired of what I'm playing at the moment, then swap it out for another game that I also want to play.

Well, even in Super Mario 64, I ultimately found it to be a chore to collect everything, let alone in newer Mario games. So my answer to it being important would be a definite no, UNLESS completing a game 100% opens up some interesting additional features and/or levels, but even that is of variable importance to each and everyone of us, so in the end, it's probably a personal opinion thing.

For me, it's also about time management. I don't have that much spare time anymore in my adult life, so gaming is mostly done in the weekends, and only sometimes on a week day, so I once I've finally finished a game, but haven 100%-ed it, I don't feel much incentive going back to it, and would rather invest my time in the next game, especially since I've got a MASSIVE backlog, that I'll probably never finish anyway...

So, I agree with the general consensus, especially were it concerns more modern games, but regardless of their and my opinions, there will probably always be some people that actually DO like collect-a-thons...