Nintendo Belittles Achievements As "Mythical Rewards"

[Greenhand]

Personally, I support Nintendos decision, just not how they put it.
They have every right to say "Achievements are for losers and games made by losers, losers" all they want, but it's not exactly tactful to put it that way.
While I'm at it, why are achievements being touted by some as a way to enhance the games replay value? I remember when you replayed a game based on it being fun, and not because you didn't get your little gold star for completing some arbitrary task. Hells, look on Youtube and you'll see plenty of videos where people beat games without doing [particular thing], or only using [weapon that everyone agrees is absolute shit], or with [random limitation clinging to your leg for no good reason], all without having to be lead by the hand or with the promise of a gold star and a cookie at the end.
If I want to go through a game only using the weakest weapon, moving left, naming all the characters with palindromes, I don't need Microsoft to give me the idea in the first fucking place.
In short: Achievements? Bah.

 

[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?

Oh forget it, you just keep getting achievements. They'll fade away soon just like High Score tables did.

I don't care as much about achievements as you think. Will I be disappointed when they fade out? Sure. Just like I was when I couldn't track my high-score in every game. I'll get over it, and move on to whatever's next.

But you don't seem to understand what you're arguing at all. You keep trying to compare to cars and such, so let me make one last attempt for you to actually understand this.


You are perfectly able to hack/mod your games. But, the company is in no way required to support it. Just like when you buy a car, there are limitations on what parts, services, and maintenance you can use, or else you void your warranty and the car dealer is under no obligation to provide you service if your warranty is voided.

 

[CleverCover]

I don't know Nintendo. I kind of like the achievements, especially the ones that come out of nowhere for an action done by accident. It's fun.

There has only been one game where I worked to get everything, and that's because I loved the game enough to do it. Everything else was just for little extra things or just for the story.

It isn't like they're forcing us either. I mean, no one is forcing anyone to play any game or play the story or do anything really. It just adds an extra part to a game. Like defeating a boss without ever touching him or something like that. If you feel like your being forced...how? I don't understand that.

Hell, this is just the first time achievements have been shown to the world. Before you bragged to your friends about how you owned someone. Now you have proof.

Also, you know when you unlock an extra costume for doing something?

That's an achievement. An early form, but an achievement non the less.

 

[Loonerinoes]

Achievements are fine, so long as developers don't decide that they are suitable enough to substitute an entire aspect of the game.

WotLK achievements in raiding for the ultra-hard encounters for example didn't mean squat to me when I did it (at least not compared to my PERSONAL feeling of achievement when I managed to down say...M'uru in TBC raiding). A little flash and a badge of e-pride? Meh, sure...but don't base an entire freaking system on it saying "Oh but raids *are* challenging now, we just decided to do it on the ultra-CHEAP way and are gonna say that if you don't have your e-badge of honor, you ain't an ultra-raider."

Seriously...screw that shit. As a raider I want to be rewarded by new content and new encounters...not by some bullshit set of pixels that looks shiny. *sigh* Ah well...that's my only gripe with achievements really. That developers just use them as an excuse to slack off. Otherwise sure - have them if you must.

 

[Reed Spacer]

I don't see the point to them myself, unless it's actually something impressive.

 

[Nexus4]

If achievemnets actually gave you something then Ninty would be missing out, but seeing as they're worthless; therefore having no incentive to actually accomplish them, I can't see any effort to put into accomplishing them.

 

[Cavouku]

I only ever really tried to get all the trophies in AC: 2, but that was because I'm an Assassin's Creed junkie. Other than that, I think Nintendo has a fine point, and there's no real need to have to put the time and money in a system that you and many other people don't agree with/like.

I have to agree with them about the whole "Do your own thing, not what we tell you to" bit. I would've loved to have just completed AC: 2 without the mundane things like dying your clothes wetlands ebony and ivory. It's cute, and unconventional (and I originally did it just for the hell of it, not knowing of the trophy), but it seems to be irrelevant to the core game...

I know, I know, I chose to do that myself. Still, bottom line, I don't see anything wrong with Nintendo's stance. I suppose I see nothing really wrong with trophies/achievements, either, but that's not the issue.

 

[Motakikurushi]

Yeah, and when all of a sudden achievements/trophies vanish, every single person who has ever played a 360 or PS3 will be begging for them back. Achievements are something we take for granted. Some achievements are hilarious and really well constructed, like sending the gnome into space on Half-Life 2. I really don't think they demand players to play a game in a certain way, hence why they're optional and often coincidental. Having an achievement or trophy pop up for something I never knew I was doing is a nice surprise. See Nintendo, it's a pleasant gesture towards players, something you've been severely lacking recently.

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

Well I kinda agree. Singleplayer achievements are fine multiplayer achievements piss me off so much. I don't see why I have to play the game online to get the technical 100% completion of it.

 

[w00tage]

I think "achievements" are nothing of the sort, they are an artificial, made-up goal so that game companies can count the time getting them as "gameplay time".

But if some people want to be skinner-boxed like that, I don't see what can be done about it. HOWEVER, when some idiot is running around with melee for his achievement and makes his team fail because he's not doing his job (all too common), he should not gain any points towards the achievement.

/implement new gameplay model - achievements can only be earned if your team wins. Otherwise - tough cookies, quit being self-centered in a team game.

 

[Broken Orange]

Valve does it, Microsoft does it, Sony does it.
Nintendo wants to be cool and unique and won't do it.

Wow, smart move guys.

Nintemdo is the hipsters of the gaming companies.

 

[Dfskelleton]

Are achievements worth nothing? Yes.
Are they extremely fun to rub into the faces of my friends? Only one man can answer that question:

Spoiler

 

[Dfskelleton]

Well I kinda agree. Singleplayer achievements are fine multiplayer achievements piss me off so much. I don't see why I have to play the game online to get the technical 100% completion of it.

This is why I have so few Acievements in Street Fighter IV: I played that game for like 3 weeks straight with little to nothing else, but almost ALL of the achievements were for multiplayer.

 

[Lynxan]

For me there are several different things I've run into when it comes to these.

First and foremost with achievements/trophies, am I still having fun? If I'm still having fun, they give me a target to playing a game a bit longer, making it at least a better value. I doubt I'd spend time looking for every "item A" if there wasn't a bit of some number to it.

On the flip side, I've recently started a little thing to myself where I try keep my score at least 50% of what it could be. Now this may sound stuck up but I have found that when I get a game, the "got to try to get half" mentality has pushed games I started but wasn't liking back for another try and more then once I started to like better after getting over a point. This lead to me actually liking Viva Pinata, Fable 2 and Saints Row. Of course a lack of fun can kill my desire to bother as well. This mostly comes up in games that there are just a lot of the same kind of game (Mainly first person shooters) where I know I could be having more fun with a different one. This came up most recently as I tried my darnedest to care about Metro 2033.

Then there's games that I have to admit (at least to me) scream that the achievements are part of what makes it fun. At the moment there's really only one set of games that do this (that I know of) and that's Dead Rising. Here's a game that when I start, the first thing I think of is "What achievement am I shooting for this time?" Different goals for different runs is kind of the point of the game more then anything.

Not that every game I even think I'll get even the 50 percernt, and don't bother trying. First, I love Rock Band/Guitar Hero, but hell if I can do better them medium. Fighting games tend to get the same reaction out of me. Then there's the online stuff, I'm just not much for going out on the net for competition, and even less for doing that for co op.

I do like the system, I beleave that at it's worst it's nothing and pointless, at best it can keep a player going at a game they all ready are liking. It is nice to be able to prove what you've done in a game too.