Games With No Multiplayer Trophies/Achievements: Yay or Nay?

[Gigaguy64]

ehh it dosent really matter to me.

If a game have them i wouldn't care but, if it does then its a plus.
Some games dont really need achievements for multiplayer.
To me it would just depend on how heavily the game relies on its multiplayer.

Nobody cares, Scott. You and your almost 2000 posts.

OT: I HATE when the majority of trophies/achievements are for multiplayer. I usually buy multiple games at a time so I have real desire to keep playing one game when I have more unplayed.

Yo, dont be hating on my post count player.

But i agree, i dont like it when the MAJORITY achievements are on multiplayer.

 

[Citrus]

Dislike multiplayer achievements, since I usually try to get 100% completion on the games I play but am not interested by most games' online offerings. If it's just something like "play your first online match" or "win your first online match", it's fine. If it's like what Bioshock 2 has, it is not fine.

Wait... what? Bioshock 2 only has things like 'get you first kill' or 'get to this rank'. In my opinion, that's pretty minimal. The problem is when games are more like Halo and require the player to complete really specific things, some of which are next to impossible or are detrimental to the enjoyment of the game.

I don't like it when achievements exist to just to make sure everybody plays the multiplayer for as long as possible. Bioshock 2 has achievements for playing a round on every map, getting to rank 40 (which I imagine would take quite a while), a bunch of "get your first X" ones, etc. It is minimal compared to most games, but it's still quite annoying. Bioshock 2 was the example I used because it was the last game I played and I'm not a big fan of its online component.

I like the way Infinity Ward handled it; they made things that could have been achievements challenges instead, so there was still fun goals to pursue and a sense of progression without making them as conspicuous and sought-after as achievements/trophies would be.

 

[rhyno435]

Yay. I like to be able to play the single player for fun, and for trophies. I like to be able to play multiplayer solely for enjoyment.

It annoys me that they just added multiplayer trophies in Uncharted 2. At least, since they added them after retail release, it won't affect me getting my Platinum once I beat it on Crushing.

BTW, Killzone 2 has the most annoying and difficult online trophies. For one, you have to place in the top 1% of players online in a week.

And don't even get me started on the trophies that require 10 000 kills online (Resistance 2, Battlefield: BC, Red Faction: Guerrilla - 5000 kills, Uncharted 2 - 2500 kills). 2500 isn't so bad I guess

 

[HotShooter]

I don't really like them because it means I have to play against other people to get achievements, and I suck against other people.
However, I think that Uncharted 2 is going to release a DLC that will contain multiplayer trophies where there were none to begin with. I don't think it's free but besides that I believe DLC trophies for multiplayer should be an option rather than be included in the main game.

 

[Orcus The Ultimate]

trophies is a way to gain more interest in an already finished game... so i really don't mind about if it has or not trophies at all.

 

[Brad Shepard]

I would say yea, because with no achievements, people might play it more then if it did have them. Look at MW2, a lot of people right?

and multiplayer games with achievements like bioshock 2 will just be played for them and then left to rot.

 

[ChipSandwich]

Depends on what the achievements are. I'd rather they be all single player, but if they're things like "win a reasonable number of matches" then that's fine. CoD did it an interesting way, and definitely approve, but the problem here is that it seems to encourage many more boosters.

 

[ShatteredBlack]

I don't mind multiplayer achievements.

What I hate is when the requirements for the achievements force players to act in ways detrimental to other players experience. (I'm looking at you, Turok's 'Grab Bag'!)

 

[Eggsnham]

I usually don't go whoring for Trophies and Achievements, but getting the occasional reward for doing something awesome is nice. MW2's challenge system does a good job, though; it's both gratifying to learn that I have "WTFPWNT" someone in a resourceful/awesome way and useful in that I can get anywhere from 500 to 25,000 XP from it.

 

[natster43]

I like Multiplayer achievements, its gives me something to strive for or are just milestones in leveling.

 

[WorkerMurphey]

I like being in control of my trophy acquisition when I should choose to put the effort into going for them. Recently I've started picking up older games whose multiplayer scene has died out making getting some trophies a pain.

It's a bummer but the net result helps me readjust my attitude toward games, they are to be played for fun, it's not another job. I guess it's the recovering WoW addict in me that sometimes accepts "needing" to accomplish something in games and "achievement hunt."

Multiplayer or not I value trophies that encourage engaging with a game on as many levels as it has to offer, be it through re-plays as a good/bad character, harder difficulties, collect-a-thons.

 

[Laxman9292]

When I checked my Modern Warfare 2, a game I have a love/hate relationship with, trophy progress I was surprised to learn to there are no trophies for multiplayer. I really like that because it means multiplayer has no obligation to be played for other than fun.

Is this something in gaming that should be reflected with future releases by other developers or do you think that multiplayer needs a reward system for those that want it? I personally like not having to go after absurd trophies such as hosting a ranked dedicated server for 4 hours like in Warhawk.

BTW, I realize CoD4 had no multiplayer achievements for the 360.

I think the in game challenges more than make up for the lack of gamerpoint achievments. besides if they make online achievements then people without XBL or even basic internet are barred from getting the full points.

 

[Numb1lp]

It sometimes gives me a reason to keep playing online.

 

[SpireOfFire]

yay. i dont want to play online and have to deal with the legions of retards on xbox live just to get a damn accomplishment.

 

[SirDeadly]

Games should have achievements for multiplayer only if they are secret achievements worth 0G!

 

[Booze Zombie]

I feel no compulsion to play a multiplayer game for achievements, but it does irk me that people decide to include multiplayer achievements in games.

Multiplayer should stand up on it's own without some little set of numbers to make people feel like they've "earned" something other than the acknowledgement of the fact that they've sunk enough time to get said achievement.

 

[CheckD3]

It's good because as you said, you only play for fun, and you don't have to worry about other people doing stupid things and messing up your good time by trying to get a trophy...but on the other hand, it means you don't get any "credit" to show off on the games when you play unless you've done the single player as well...which many people do, but still