Nintendo Belittles Achievements As "Mythical Rewards"

[Ghengis John]

Your Gamerscore can't be "Not Participating".

Why can't it be "Doesn't Care"?

That's not me trying to be a smart ass, that's me asking if you really don't want to participate then don't stress out about them. Why care what your gamer score is?

Did you even read more than that one post. I care because Achievements have a cost. I would prefer to have a Gameshark or Action Replay available but because of Achievements, it just won't happen.

Ah you blame achievements for the death of your beloved cheating devices? (not that anyone who knew game genie didn't love it) I have some bad news for you, they don't have anything to do with the death of your cheat devices. Console manufacturers never approved of the devices, competitive multiplayer provided the impetus for anti-cheating measures which internet enabled firmware updates supplied. The death knell to hardwired cheat systems wasn't single player achievements, but universal console internet accessibility. Your anger is misdirected.

 

[shadyh8er]

But, I like the sound trophies make when you get them! It makes me feel good!

 

[shadyh8er]

First double post in how long? *siiiigh*

 

[Latinidiot]

I like certain Achievements. I don't care for the kind that rewards defeating the boss, but the kind that shows the developer thought about it. You know, like how they used to give in game achievements for stuff.

 

[Sonic Doctor]

I do agree with them, but at times I like achievements. With some games, they give it more value with more things to go for or different ways to do certain things (like Gravity Gun only through Ravenholm). Multiplayer ones are annoying though.

Multiplayer ones are annoyingly stupid. I'm fine with the ones for games like Halo, because obviously there are going to be people playing Halo because it is popular(I only have 2 achievements left for Reach).

But where it gets stupid is when you get a game and you get all the single player achievements and then find out that the last 3 are multiplayer, but you can't get them because nobody is playing the game on Live.

I love achievements, they give replay value to games, which allows me the get my money's worth out of them.

Edit: That is why I think there should be some kind of Live Bot in games that have Multiplayer achievements. If nobody is playing the game on Live, you can still get the achievement by playing against a Live Bot.

 

[Jaded Scribe]

I actually find this disappointing. I love achievements (as I talk about here [http://jadedscribe.blogspot.com/2011/01/achievements-and-gaming.html]) and I think they are important to gaming.

If Nintendo wants to keep the openendedness of their games, they only have to make the achievements "hidden" where the player doesn't know what it is unless they earn it (or make the conscious decision to find out online).

...at which point they are no different than 360 Achievements.

Exactly my point. I like the 360 and PS3 achievement/trophy system. A lot of games (Heavy Rain for example) keep all their trophies hidden so players don't know what they are until they get them. But, you have something to work for if that's your thing.

Really? How would you know what to work towards with a secret achievement?

I don't chase Achievements but the secret ones would force me to go look online to find out how to achieve them (so as not to waste time going down the wrong path).

It's like those secrets in games that you could never figure out without a guide. Most people find that stuff unacceptable (like the stupid treasure chests you shouldn't open in FF 12 to get ultimate weapons later on) but secret achievements are good??

No, you stumble upon them in-game. Completing a task a certain way, or taking a certain story branch unlocks the achievements. Without looking anything up, I got probably close to half (and many are mutually exclusive, requiring multiple playthroughs).

A lot of the hidden trophies work that way (similar to how certain Nintendo games give stamps, as they said in the article).

But, if you really want to find them all, then you don't have to go read through extensive guides, you just find a list of what achievements are offered. You can find them in the same kind of setup as the non-hidden achievements are, and so you have a quick reference.

And again, if they aren't your thing, then just don't do them. Unlike other in-game things (like your FF12 example), there is no missing out on awesome items or other in-game rewards if you don't do them.

That depends on what value you place on Achievements. If you value Achievements as much as some others value ultimate weapons then it is exactly the same thing and there are plenty of people who value Achievements at that level.

Not all secret achievements can be achieved through normal gameplay and for those that can't, you are going to have to look them up somewhere since the game isn't going to tell you. It is exactly like the FF 12 example. BTW, the ultimate weapons usually aren't "awesome", they are more appealing to those who want to 100% a game, just like those who chase achievements.

Anyway, if you like chasing achievements that's your business and I am not bashing you for that. I am a 100% completion type of person too except that I don't care about achievements because bragging points don't matter to me. I didn't get 120 Shines to impress anyone. Just don't pretend that Achievements don't have a cost.

I responded to your idea of how it costs because you may not be able to do them if you prefer to play a certain way (e.g. via cheats).

It comes down to choice. Achievements vs Cheats. Which is more important to you? As gamers, almost everything we do comes down to a choice. Do we use our powers for good or evil? Do we get upgrades that help us deal more damage, or survive longer? Do we kill a suspicious NPC, or do we let him go and see what happens?

There's no reason to treat Achievements like a bad thing. They are just another choice to be made.

Well if Achievements shouldn't be treated like bad things then neither should the other option, cheats. We both know that cheats are looked down upon.

Cheats and achievements are a little different though. The former means you jumped through a game without actually utilizing skill. Game developers discourage this at some level, because more and more, games are becoming art. We may look at the devs like money-hungry corporate baddies who don't care after we fork over our cash. But they are more than that. They want players to experience the game as it was envisioned.

Also, for many games, there are mods that DO allow you to cheat. The game devs may circumscribe the limits of cheating allowed (especially in a multiplayer format). Also, if a game does have multiplayer, cheating mods may be made unavailable even in single player because of how the software is set up. It may be that mods that can change something in single-player can be maneuvered to work in multiplayer, which is bullshit.

Well, you can have Achievements AND cheats but that just isn't the way it's set up. So Achievements are not the opposite of cheats by default, that is just the way it is currently set up.

If you could turn off Achievements on the 360 then there could be a cheat device that used that function. As it stands, you can't turn them off and so no cheat device can do it either.

I feel that Achievements are being used to control how you play in regards to cheats, mods, trainers, etc... and quite frankly I am sick of being told how to use a product I BOUGHT. The way I see it, Achievements are being used as a form of DRM. In fact, in the case of Starcraft II that is EXACTLY how they are being used.

Oh BTW, it is one thing for a dev to WANT you to experience the game the way they intended. It is quite another to try and force it.

What incentive do game companies have to support cheat devices? Why should they?

And in Starcraft, how is being used as DRM?

I'm having a hard time taking your arguments seriously, since it seems to consist of "I am upset because the game companies won't let me cheat." Rather than any real reason that Achievements are bad.

 

[MikailCaboose]

I can't believe people can be annoyed by achievements. They're completely optional, even more so than most in game challenges. How can it possibly be frustating to you that occasionally a little message will pop up and inform you you got an achievement? Heck, you can turn those messages off.

Does it anger you just to know that someone out there is enjoying them?

Never cared for achievements either. If I want to do something in a game, I'll do it how I want to.

Because achievements stop you doing that...

I never said they stopped me from doing that, I said I "never cared for achievements", since I ignore them anyways. I could care less whether or not I had them or not.

 

[Gindil]

I'm siding with Nintendo on this. The fact is, I like to explore in games and find my OWN way of doing things. Achievements are great and all but after a point, when could you sit down and just look at something for a decent reward that isn't an achievement?

 

[Jaded Scribe]

snip

Because cheating devices extend the life of a game, just like your precious achievements. When Nintendo was fighting Galoob over the Game Genie, Sega was doing the opposite and licensing the Game Genie for the Genesis. They knew that people would be more likely to continue buying games if they knew they could beat the game with cheats if they needed to. The other option is to stop buying games because they are too hard.

Yup, Sega's plan certainly worked. That is why they are still a relevant game company. I'm not saying that their demise is solely because of cheating devices, but it's clear that allowing cheating didn't do anything to extend the life of their games.

Nintendo is a very controlling company so it shouldn't surprise anyone that they want to force you to play a game their way. Of course, back in those days the games were alot harder too. I am glad that they lost to Galoob and I am not happy that now console makers are finding other ways to take away cheat devices.

Incorrect. Nintendo is against achievements because they DON'T want to force you play a certain way. They want you to play how you want without feeling herded in a certain direction by achievements.

I don't cheat often you see, but I reserve the right. Is that really so hard to understand? I had the Game Genie for the NES, SNES, Genesis. The Gameshark for the PS1 and PS2 and the Action Replay for the Gamecube and the DS. I hardly use them but they are there if I decide to. You want me to give that up so you can have a glorified high score table. Well, I can't take your argument seriously. Devs are not gods and sometimes they make bad design choices and cheat devices can be used to get around those. Besides, what kind of gamer doesn't like to look under the hood and do things you were meant to do?

What "right"? There is no right to cheat. You paid for a product, you received said product. Nowhere do you have the "right" to expect companies to allow you to cheat. This kind of consumer elitism (i.e. "Companies should bend over for me because I am the almighty consumer and deserve to get whatever I want from them.") is bullshit, and absolutely disgusts me. There is a line between what a company should be expected to provide, and what is simply greedy consumerism.

Yes, cheat devices can be nice. I have a couple cheating mods for Dragon Age that I love. But, I would also understand if they didn't allow it. I am in no way entitled to those mods, or the ability to cheat the game. If the devs feel that a game is better served by ensuring that achievements are gotten legitimately, that is their choice. It's their game, not yours.

 

[Geo Da Sponge]

I can't believe people can be annoyed by achievements. They're completely optional, even more so than most in game challenges. How can it possibly be frustating to you that occasionally a little message will pop up and inform you you got an achievement? Heck, you can turn those messages off.

Does it anger you just to know that someone out there is enjoying them?

Never cared for achievements either. If I want to do something in a game, I'll do it how I want to.

Because achievements stop you doing that...

I never said they stopped me from doing that, I said I "never cared for achievements", since I ignore them anyways. I could care less whether or not I had them or not.

Fair enough, I seem to have misinterpreted your post.

Although I think you mean "I 'couldn't' care less".

 

[Jaded Scribe]

snip

Because cheating devices extend the life of a game, just like your precious achievements. When Nintendo was fighting Galoob over the Game Genie, Sega was doing the opposite and licensing the Game Genie for the Genesis. They knew that people would be more likely to continue buying games if they knew they could beat the game with cheats if they needed to. The other option is to stop buying games because they are too hard.

Yup, Sega's plan certainly worked. That is why they are still a relevant game company. I'm not saying that their demise is solely because of cheating devices, but it's clear that allowing cheating didn't do anything to extend the life of their games.

Nintendo is a very controlling company so it shouldn't surprise anyone that they want to force you to play a game their way. Of course, back in those days the games were alot harder too. I am glad that they lost to Galoob and I am not happy that now console makers are finding other ways to take away cheat devices.

Incorrect. Nintendo is against achievements because they DON'T want to force you play a certain way. They want you to play how you want without feeling herded in a certain direction by achievements.

I don't cheat often you see, but I reserve the right. Is that really so hard to understand? I had the Game Genie for the NES, SNES, Genesis. The Gameshark for the PS1 and PS2 and the Action Replay for the Gamecube and the DS. I hardly use them but they are there if I decide to. You want me to give that up so you can have a glorified high score table. Well, I can't take your argument seriously. Devs are not gods and sometimes they make bad design choices and cheat devices can be used to get around those. Besides, what kind of gamer doesn't like to look under the hood and do things you were meant to do?

What "right"? There is no right to cheat. You paid for a product, you received said product. Nowhere do you have the "right" to expect companies to allow you to cheat. This kind of consumer elitism (i.e. "Companies should bend over for me because I am the almighty consumer and deserve to get whatever I want from them.") is bullshit, and absolutely disgusts me. There is a line between what a company should be expected to provide, and what is simply greedy consumerism.

Yes, cheat devices can be nice. I have a couple cheating mods for Dragon Age that I love. But, I would also understand if they didn't allow it. I am in no way entitled to those mods, or the ability to cheat the game. If the devs feel that a game is better served by ensuring that achievements are gotten legitimately, that is their choice. It's their game, not yours.

Consumer elitism?

Let me see if I understand this.

You buy a car but you can only drive how, when and where the manufacturer says you can?

You buy dish soap but you can only use it in the sink. Never in the dishwasher, washing machine or on a scrub brush to clean carpets?

Do you approve of those examples? See in both of those cases you can use what you bought as you see fit so long as you break no laws.

Besides, Nintendo already lost this fight to Galoob a long time ago. That's why the Game Genie didn't go away after Nintendo sued them. Nintendo is not allowed to tell you what you can and cannot do with YOUR consoles and games. Get it!

Again, there is a difference. When I buy soap, I am buying a cleaning agent. When I buy a car, I am buying a means of personal transportation. These are straw man arguments that are not related to games or cheating in the slightest.

When you buy a game, you get the game. You get EXACTLY what was paid for: a piece of software that can be used when you want to play, in the location you want to play (with some caveats here about requiring the console/tv/etc, and possibly DRM requiring you to use it on only your console/PC). Cheats require (a) hacking by a third party; or (b) for the game company to invest the time and effort to program in those cheats.

In the case of the former, companies have the right to seek damages. Having their code hacked violates their intellectual property. In the latter, it is up to the developer to decide if it is warranted.

Some companies choose to allow you to cheat through the use of mods. Others choose not to. It is a choice that is up to the developer. They are under no obligation to make it possible for you to cheat.

 

[sylekage]

Well that's good for them, but I kind of like achievements every now and then. Like someone said at the top, The gravity gun your way through ravenholm achievement was a ***** and a half, and it was a good feeling to have gotten it. Some achievements though are ridiculous to even try for or even have at all! Some games even require you to go through the entire thing again. So there are many pros and cons for achievements.

 

[Hunde Des Krieg]

Kind of like promotions and the profit motive.

 

[Jaded Scribe]

snip

Because cheating devices extend the life of a game, just like your precious achievements. When Nintendo was fighting Galoob over the Game Genie, Sega was doing the opposite and licensing the Game Genie for the Genesis. They knew that people would be more likely to continue buying games if they knew they could beat the game with cheats if they needed to. The other option is to stop buying games because they are too hard.

Yup, Sega's plan certainly worked. That is why they are still a relevant game company. I'm not saying that their demise is solely because of cheating devices, but it's clear that allowing cheating didn't do anything to extend the life of their games.

Nintendo is a very controlling company so it shouldn't surprise anyone that they want to force you to play a game their way. Of course, back in those days the games were alot harder too. I am glad that they lost to Galoob and I am not happy that now console makers are finding other ways to take away cheat devices.

Incorrect. Nintendo is against achievements because they DON'T want to force you play a certain way. They want you to play how you want without feeling herded in a certain direction by achievements.

I don't cheat often you see, but I reserve the right. Is that really so hard to understand? I had the Game Genie for the NES, SNES, Genesis. The Gameshark for the PS1 and PS2 and the Action Replay for the Gamecube and the DS. I hardly use them but they are there if I decide to. You want me to give that up so you can have a glorified high score table. Well, I can't take your argument seriously. Devs are not gods and sometimes they make bad design choices and cheat devices can be used to get around those. Besides, what kind of gamer doesn't like to look under the hood and do things you were meant to do?

What "right"? There is no right to cheat. You paid for a product, you received said product. Nowhere do you have the "right" to expect companies to allow you to cheat. This kind of consumer elitism (i.e. "Companies should bend over for me because I am the almighty consumer and deserve to get whatever I want from them.") is bullshit, and absolutely disgusts me. There is a line between what a company should be expected to provide, and what is simply greedy consumerism.

Yes, cheat devices can be nice. I have a couple cheating mods for Dragon Age that I love. But, I would also understand if they didn't allow it. I am in no way entitled to those mods, or the ability to cheat the game. If the devs feel that a game is better served by ensuring that achievements are gotten legitimately, that is their choice. It's their game, not yours.

Consumer elitism?

Let me see if I understand this.

You buy a car but you can only drive how, when and where the manufacturer says you can?

You buy dish soap but you can only use it in the sink. Never in the dishwasher, washing machine or on a scrub brush to clean carpets?

Do you approve of those examples? See in both of those cases you can use what you bought as you see fit so long as you break no laws.

Besides, Nintendo already lost this fight to Galoob a long time ago. That's why the Game Genie didn't go away after Nintendo sued them. Nintendo is not allowed to tell you what you can and cannot do with YOUR consoles and games. Get it!

Again, there is a difference. When I buy soap, I am buying a cleaning agent. When I buy a car, I am buying a means of personal transportation. These are straw man arguments that are not related to games or cheating in the slightest.

When you buy a game, you get the game. You get EXACTLY what was paid for: a piece of software that can be used when you want to play, in the location you want to play (with some caveats here about requiring the console/tv/etc, and possibly DRM requiring you to use it on only your console/PC). Cheats require (a) hacking by a third party; or (b) for the game company to invest the time and effort to program in those cheats.

In the case of the former, companies have the right to seek damages. Having their code hacked violates their intellectual property. In the latter, it is up to the developer to decide if it is warranted.

Some companies choose to allow you to cheat through the use of mods. Others choose not to. It is a choice that is up to the developer. They are under no obligation to make it possible for you to cheat.

Cheats are NOT illegal. Get that through your head.

Cheating devices are NOT illegal either.

Look, I get that so many people on this are so pro-gaming company (read anti-consumer) that it is beyond ridiculous but get this, you CAN run anything you want on your hardware so long as you are not breaking any laws. You wanna run mods for Dragon Age? It doesn't matter if BioWare approves you can do it!

You wanna run Action Replay on your Gamecube? It doesn't matter if Nintendo approves.

What is so hard to understand about this. The game industry is not special. They don't get special powers just because they want them. Your Wii and your TV are both consumer products that you BOUGHT, not rented and are yours to do with as you see fit!

A company does have rights too. I know you think that they have no rights, but they do. They are perfectly allowed to make their products unresponsive to thirdparty hacks/software/etc.

What you don't seem to understand, is that you are getting what you paid for. You want to scream and cry about how you should be able to do whatever you want with it, and yet you are getting what you paid for! Why is this hard to understand?