Wii U Forum

Topic: "Acheivements" on the Wii U

Showing 21 to 40 of 141

AuthorMessage
Avatar

SCAR392

21. Posted:

@AlexSays
No one hates achievements/trophies because they're on other systems. I actually REALLY used to want some sort of goal system on the Wii.
Time has passed, and alot of people have seen how unnecessary it is to actually enjoy the game, including me. Not only that, but the goals have become crappier, more time consuming, and uninteresting over the years.
I'd rather not Nintendo follow suit with goals on their games, and them not following suit with the Wii U on day one probably shows that Nintendo won't have it at all.
I understand some people like it, but that doesn't mean not wanting it means hatred towards any other console.
Achievements/trophies is a PS/Xbox thing. Let it be.

$¢@®³’²

AuthorMessage
Avatar

Varia01

22. Posted:

Warruz wrote:

Phatosaurus wrote:

Warruz wrote:

Varia01 wrote:

I wouldn't like that. Games are meant to have fun on, not to win. Stressing yourself with trying to get achievements and proving yourself could produce frustration. Video games' purpose is fun. Enjoying the gameplay, storyline, and graphics (etc.) is much better than trying to win.

You could argue very easily the opposite of that , being some derive their fun from the challenge.

You don't need achievements to add challenge to a game.

No, but achievements can be a way to bring extra challenges to a game. In fact i think NSMU would benefit the most from them , you can have time related achievements, no damage through a whole world achievements etc. They can be really far out there because they are entirely optional.

Look, we all see achievements in different ways.

Currently Playing: Metroid Prime 3, Zelda Twilight Princess, & Metroid Other M
Hyped for: Sonic Lost World, Super Smash Bros 3DS, & Dream Team

Even though I have beaten many of the games I'm still playing, I play them not to win, but to have fun.

AuthorMessage
Avatar

SCAR392

23. Posted:

CM30 wrote:

I don't mind achievements. Just don't do what I hear Sony and Microsoft do and force developers to include them in their games (that's why so many games have poorly designed ones that were likely just thrown in at the last minute).

This is probably the reason why Nintendo won't include them. They would gave to demand it.
Also, it's been years since Xbox 360 and PS3 did it. It they really wanted to, they would have tried to implement account systems and other things people complain about.
Nintendo probably just doesn't care about alot of stuff Xbox and PS do. Whether people see that as a positive or negative is a different story.

$¢@®³’²

AuthorMessage
Avatar

AlexSays

24. Posted:

SCAR392 wrote:

Achievements/trophies is a PS/Xbox thing. Let it be.

No they're not, did you just recently start following video games? Achievements have been around forever. Developers were putting incentives to achieve certain feats in games in the 90's, long before Microsoft and Sony's achievement system.

You can attribute them to Sony and Microsoft, that's fine. But not wanting a feature because its a 'MS and Sony thing' is short sighted at best. I'm guessing you don't want any of the features on the other consoles because they are also 'Sony and Microsoft' things, correct?

Optional features do nothing to hurt a game. You can pretend it does all you want to justify not having said optional features, but that doesn't make it true.

Edited on by AlexSays

AlexSays

AuthorMessage
Avatar

Warruz

25. Posted:

Varia01 wrote:

Warruz wrote:

Phatosaurus wrote:

Warruz wrote:

Varia01 wrote:

I wouldn't like that. Games are meant to have fun on, not to win. Stressing yourself with trying to get achievements and proving yourself could produce frustration. Video games' purpose is fun. Enjoying the gameplay, storyline, and graphics (etc.) is much better than trying to win.

You could argue very easily the opposite of that , being some derive their fun from the challenge.

You don't need achievements to add challenge to a game.

No, but achievements can be a way to bring extra challenges to a game. In fact i think NSMU would benefit the most from them , you can have time related achievements, no damage through a whole world achievements etc. They can be really far out there because they are entirely optional.

Look, we all see achievements in different ways.

Im aware but playing a bit of devils advocate tends to help debates to see both sides. Perhaps my view on achievements is a bit different as i never owned a Xbox 360 or a PS3 and im PC gamers mainly. Which as far as that goes achievements in steam play a very minor role , and achievements in MMO's while playing a more important role then Steam achievements still dont detract anything from the game nor force you to play a certain way.

Whats most interesting is nintendo land has achievements simply not called achievements aka stamps.

Edited on by Warruz

Check out my Video Game Podcast / Website - Pauseyourgame.com

Twitter: Warruz

AuthorMessage
Avatar

SCAR392

26. Posted:

AlexSays wrote:

SCAR392 wrote:

Achievements/trophies is a PS/Xbox thing. Let it be.

No they're not, did you just recently start following video games? Achievements have been around forever. Developers were putting incentives to achieve certain feats in games in the 90's, long before Microsoft and Sony's achievement system.

You can attribute them to Sony and Microsoft, that's fine. But not wanting a feature because its a 'MS and Sony thing' is short sighted at best. I'm guessing you don't want any of the features on the other consoles because they are also 'Sony and Microsoft' things, correct?

Optional features do nothing to hurt a game. You can pretend it does all you want to justify not having said optional features, but that doesn't make it true.

You gotta stop, bro. No one hates features because Xbox, PS, or any other system has them.
The point is whether they're necessary, and will it distract from other areas of the game. We shouldn't be expecting a goal system in our games at all, really.
I honestly don't want them if Nintendo has to go out of their way to do so. If they add it, then fine, but I don't see it happening.
I seriously don't care, that's why I find it interesting you have to call out 'haters'.
People like me that don't really want a goal system aren't 'haters'.
We just don't really give a crap.

Edited on by SCAR392

$¢@®³’²

AuthorMessage
Avatar

Reala

27. Posted:

Timesplitters 2 had achievements on gamecube or trophies as they called it, pretty frivolous I guess as most are but can still bring an element of fun all the same, most achievements I see popping up I pretty much forget about quite quickly, but if they give a few more little oddball goals outside of the main aim of the game then what's the harm.

there's nothing that's certain... of that you can be certain

AuthorMessage
Avatar

DefHalan

28. Posted:

I find more often than not Achievements dictate the way people play. If there is an Achievement to get 100 kills with a certain weapon then most people will use that 1 weapon until they get the 100 kills needed. The Achievements in Gears of War were like that and caused people who weren't that good at Snipers to grab the Sniper every round just so they could work towards that Achievement. In my opinion Achievements restrict what a player will do instead of letting the player decide what to do. As everyone has said this is not always the case but in all my years of play Xbox 360 and talking to my friends this is how most people use Achievements. Leave Achievements out of games Nintendo, I don't want to feel compelled to jump 1,000 times in a single Mario level or to be in last place on Mario Kart just so I might be able to get and use the Blue Shell, or to play the Song of Time in a certain dungeon to unlock a certain secret (Let me find it on my own and let me feel like I discovered something new rather than what you told me to discover)

http://dudehugespeaks.tumblr.com/post/44243746261/nickels-dimes-and-quarters
http://www.penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/why-console-specs-dont-matter
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/200271/Video_Don_Daglow_on_nextgen_transition_traps_and_treasures.php

3DS Friend Code: 2621-2786-9784 | Nintendo Network ID: DefHalan

AuthorMessage
Avatar

AlexSays

29. Posted:

SCAR392 wrote:

You gotta stop, bro. No one hates features because Xbox, PS, or any other system has them.
The point is whether they're necessary, and will it distract from other areas of the game. We shouldn't be expecting a goal system in our games at all, really.
I honestly don't want them if Nintendo has to go out of their way to do so. If they they add it, then fine, but I don't see it happening.
I seriously don't care, that's why I find it interesting you have to call out 'haters'.
People like me that don't really want a goal system aren't 'haters'.
We just don't really give a crap.

How do optional features detract from other aspects of the game? If you believe you have a justifiable reason for not liking them, what is that reason? What game has been negatively affected by achievements?

GameCube games have had achievements. iPhone games have achievements. STEAM games have achievements. But you specifically say it is a 'Microsoft and Sony' thing and imply they should stay there. You expect me to believe you're being unbiased here when you have a history of justifying everything nintendo does and you blatantly ignore all other achievement systems?

What specific example of a game being hurt by achievements has caused you to think this way? If its all opinion based and you just don't care for them, why do you think the console should miss out on an optional feature simply because you don't want it? That seems a bit unfair to the people that do want it.

DefHalan wrote:

(Let me find it on my own and let me feel like I discovered something new rather than what you told me to discover)

Thankfully it is an optional feature and therefore you can ignore them entirely. I have no idea what achievements I have on any system, yet I manage to play games just fine.

Edited on by AlexSays

AlexSays

AuthorMessage
Avatar

DefHalan

30. Posted:

AlexSays wrote:

DefHalan wrote:

(Let me find it on my own and let me feel like I discovered something new rather than what you told me to discover)

Thankfully it is an optional feature and therefore you can ignore them entirely. I have no idea what achievements I have on any system, yet I manage to play games just fine.

I am glad you can do that but a lot of players do not ignore them and it does change player behavior in game

DefHalan wrote:

If there is an Achievement to get 100 kills with a certain weapon then most people will use that 1 weapon until they get the 100 kills needed. The Achievements in Gears of War were like that and caused people who weren't that good at Snipers to grab the Sniper every round just so they could work towards that Achievement. In my opinion Achievements restrict what a player will do instead of letting the player decide what to do.

Edited on by DefHalan

http://dudehugespeaks.tumblr.com/post/44243746261/nickels-dimes-and-quarters
http://www.penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/why-console-specs-dont-matter
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/200271/Video_Don_Daglow_on_nextgen_transition_traps_and_treasures.php

3DS Friend Code: 2621-2786-9784 | Nintendo Network ID: DefHalan

AuthorMessage
Avatar

SCAR392

31. Posted:

@AlexSays
You're assuming. Xbox 360 and PS3 have implemented the system across all their games, for everyone to see. There is a gamerscore. There is a trophy count.
Has any Nintendo system ever had that? No.
The difference is implementing it into the system.
I'm not biased at all. I like Xbox 360 quite a bit, and I have a PS3. My point is that it doesn't matter, so I don't care if they add it or not.

You need to quit thinking I'm biased and accept my opinion as it is. I even gave you reasons for my opinion, which is they shouldn't waste their time if they don't have to, and I just don't really care.

Edited on by SCAR392

$¢@®³’²

AuthorMessage
Avatar

AlexSays

32. Posted:

DefHalan wrote:

I am glad you can do that but a lot of players do not ignore them and it does change player behavior in game]

So optional features should only be implemented if 100% of the player base enjoys having them? I'm guessing you're not a huge fan of voice chat in games then.

And that is not the best example, people that like using a sniper rifle would run towards it regardless. There is no point reward for being the first one to reach the rocket launchers in Halo games, yet EVERYONE wants it. Blaming an achievement on that is not well substantiated when the same thing occurs in any similar online FPS/TPS.

AlexSays

AuthorMessage
Avatar

Warruz

33. Posted:

DefHalan wrote:

AlexSays wrote:

DefHalan wrote:

(Let me find it on my own and let me feel like I discovered something new rather than what you told me to discover)

Thankfully it is an optional feature and therefore you can ignore them entirely. I have no idea what achievements I have on any system, yet I manage to play games just fine.

I am glad you can do that but a lot of players do not ignore them and it does change player behavior in game

DefHalan wrote:

If there is an Achievement to get 100 kills with a certain weapon then most people will use that 1 weapon until they get the 100 kills needed. The Achievements in Gears of War were like that and caused people who weren't that good at Snipers to grab the Sniper every round just so they could work towards that Achievement. In my opinion Achievements restrict what a player will do instead of letting the player decide what to do.

But is it the achievement itself that is causing the change in behavior or is it how the achievement system works ? If you are using Xbox 360 as an example then all your achievements reward points that are then put together to give you a score (my understanding, never owned a 360) that is attached to your online handle. While for Steam there is no achievements points but rather simply achievements, and while they are attached to your account there is no total scoring of them.

So to my main question, is it the system or the achievements them selves that cause this problem?

Edited on by Warruz

Check out my Video Game Podcast / Website - Pauseyourgame.com

Twitter: Warruz

AuthorMessage
Avatar

DefHalan

34. Posted:

AlexSays wrote:

DefHalan wrote:

I am glad you can do that but a lot of players do not ignore them and it does change player behavior in game]

So optional features should only be implemented if 100% of the player base enjoys having them? I'm guessing you're not a huge fan of voice chat in games then.

And that is not the best example, people that like using a sniper rifle would run towards it regardless. There is no point reward for being the first one to reach the rocket launchers in Halo games, yet EVERYONE wants it. Blaming an achievement on that is not well substantiated when the same thing occurs in any similar online FPS/TPS.

I do not like features, even optional ones, that will control, even slightly, how people play. People should be able to play the way they want without that small optional Achievement trying to tell them to use the Rocket Launcher to Shoot a Warthog. That is why I believe Nintendo is not having a universal achievement feature. Nintendo wants people to play the games how they want, not how Nintendo wants.

http://dudehugespeaks.tumblr.com/post/44243746261/nickels-dimes-and-quarters
http://www.penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/why-console-specs-dont-matter
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/200271/Video_Don_Daglow_on_nextgen_transition_traps_and_treasures.php

3DS Friend Code: 2621-2786-9784 | Nintendo Network ID: DefHalan

AuthorMessage
Avatar

AlexSays

35. Posted:

SCAR392 wrote:

You're assuming. Xbox 360 and PS3 have implemented the system across all their games, for everyone to see. There is a gamerscore. There is a trophy count.
Has any Nintendo system ever had that? No.
The difference is implementing it into the system.
I'm not biased at all. I like Xbox 360 quite a bit, and I have a PS3. My point is that it doesn't matter, so I don't care if they add it or not.

You need to quit thinking I'm biased and accept my opinion as it is. I even gave you reasons for my opinion, which is they shouldn't waste their time if they don't have to, and I just don't really care.

According to you, Nintendo can program the Wii U to completely recognize voice functions with a simple update. You think implementing an achievement system would be drastically more difficult and use up valuable resources?

You keep going on about this waste of time, can you give me one example of a game that had a longer development time due to achievements? If you're not completely biased (not holding my breath) you should have specific example to make you so sure this would be a burden on Nintendo and developers.

AlexSays

AuthorMessage
Avatar

DefHalan

36. Posted:

Warruz wrote:

But is it the achievement itself that is causing the change in behavior or is it how the achievement system works ? If you are using Xbox 360 as an example then all your achievements reward points that are then put together to give you a score (my understanding, never owned a 360) that is attached to your online handle. While for Steam there is no achievements points but rather simply achievements, and while they are attached to your account there is no total scoring of them.

So to my main question, is it the system or the achievements them selves that cause this problem?

On Steam, Team Fortress 2 rewards you with weapons and other items when you get Achievements and I have even gotten obsessed with collecting those Optional Achievements just to get a weapon or item. It changed the way I play. It could be the way it is implemented and not all games have bad Achievements and not all Achievements are bad but if I have an option to not play with Achievements then that is going to be what I do so that I am not tempted. That is why I am against Achievements, even optional ones.

http://dudehugespeaks.tumblr.com/post/44243746261/nickels-dimes-and-quarters
http://www.penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/why-console-specs-dont-matter
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/200271/Video_Don_Daglow_on_nextgen_transition_traps_and_treasures.php

3DS Friend Code: 2621-2786-9784 | Nintendo Network ID: DefHalan

AuthorMessage
Avatar

SCAR392

37. Posted:

@Warruz & @DefHalan
I agree. I would often follow the suggested goal. Much of the time, though, I would realize there was one there that I had no intention of completing because of how time consuming it was.
1,000,000 kills is NOT gonna happen for me. I have fun playing the game, but having the impossible goals, and no real incentive makes me not care at all.
Perhaps Xbox One could change the way their system handles them, but as of now, I don't really have the want for any such thing.

$¢@®³’²

AuthorMessage
Avatar

SCAR392

38. Posted:

AlexSays wrote:

SCAR392 wrote:

You're assuming. Xbox 360 and PS3 have implemented the system across all their games, for everyone to see. There is a gamerscore. There is a trophy count.
Has any Nintendo system ever had that? No.
The difference is implementing it into the system.
I'm not biased at all. I like Xbox 360 quite a bit, and I have a PS3. My point is that it doesn't matter, so I don't care if they add it or not.

You need to quit thinking I'm biased and accept my opinion as it is. I even gave you reasons for my opinion, which is they shouldn't waste their time if they don't have to, and I just don't really care.

If you're not completely biased (not holding my breath)

I'm not gonna answer you, because of this, right here.

$¢@®³’²

AuthorMessage
Avatar

AlexSays

39. Posted:

DefHalan wrote:

I do not like features, even optional ones, that will control, even slightly, how people play. People should be able to play the way they want without that small optional Achievement trying to tell them to use the Rocket Launcher to Shoot a Warthog. That is why I believe Nintendo is not having a universal achievement feature. Nintendo wants people to play the games how they want, not how Nintendo wants.

Nintendo games have already had achievements. Didn't Metroid Prime 3 have achievements.. did that dictate how you played the game?

Didn't NSMB Wii have achievements? Didn't that Wario platformer have achievements? Was anyone here really disappointed and unable to enjoy the game because there were optional goals?

AlexSays

AuthorMessage
Avatar

AlexSays

40. Posted:

SCAR392 wrote:

1,000,000 kills is NOT gonna happen for me. I have fun playing the game, but having the impossible goals, and no real incentive makes me not care at all.

You have to see this from a rational perspective

You're asking other people to be deprived of achievements because sometimes they are unreachable for you and that makes you sad. Maybe I am just an altruistic person, but if there is a completely OPTIONAL thing that some people will enjoy and that I can ignore, I am all for it.

Sorry I don't want to dictate how other people enjoy games

AlexSays