Nintendo Belittles Achievements As "Mythical Rewards"

[Nieroshai]

Achievements are fun to pursue, but a little overrated if you don't get something in-game for at least getting all achievements. In SSBB, each "achievement" gave you something, and trophies helped the player unlock content as well. What the hell does "gamerscore" do for me on xbox live? PS3 trophies do nothing either, but at least don't pretend to be more than just a way to keep track of things you haven't done yet. So yeah, fun but not something worth pulling my hair out over.

 

[MetallicaRulez0]

Achievements are cool I suppose, but in the end they really don't add much for the average gamer. For people with OCD, I imagine they're half the fun of gaming these days.

I personally don't give 2 shits about achievements, on Xbox or WoW. The points don't do anything on either platform and the only thing they're really good for is a nice surprise every once in a while.

 

[Snotnarok]

Achievements are dumb as hell, to give proof of this I got an achievement the other day for playing a game on multiplayer, I didn't get into a match I just started it up and got one. Really I feel so skilled to have 'earned' this.

And the amount of morons who blindly charge in trying to get these achievements wind up getting their team killed in a multiplayer match.

 

[Jaded Scribe]

snip

I never said that a company HAS TO support hacking/modding/cheating but they also shouldn't make it impossible or use punitive measures if you do. I did give a reason why companies should, it's good business to give people more reasons to buy games instead of less. Sega, for example, licensed the Game Genie seeing it as a benefit to game sales. After all, how could cheating on Sonic possibly hurt Sega's sales?

It's a kin to Nintendo coming to my house and taking away any DS game that I used an Action Replay on.

You seem to be arguing that if BioWare told you stop using mods, you would do so because the devs should be able to tell you what you can and can't do with a game.

It is my argument that when you buy a product you can do anything you like with it within the bounds of the law. Not the bounds of the devs, the law. I don't buy this "you are only buying a license" crap. When I rent for $3.50 then I am getting a license but when I buy I getting a product. The game industry is not special and they don't get special rules just because they make a product with 0's and 1's.

What special rules? When you buy a disk, it gives you no rights over the content. None. Zero. Zilch. You can do whatever you want with the disk. You can do whatever you want with the case. You can use the disk whenever you want.

You are buying a plastic disk. You are NOT buying any kind rights to the contents of said disk, outside of being able to use it in an approved device. DVDs/Blu-Rays have limitations in how they are used, and they have preventive measures to protect the contents of the disk. CDs do as well.

Video games aren't doing anything different than these guys. They just manage to piss off more people with the same limitations.

And as far as licensing, it's not as much of a bullshit case as you think. Considering they must actively support and maintain access to online multiplayer content, they HAVE to be able to set boundaries on how their software is manipulated, for the safety and enjoyment of their playerbase.[/quote]

Special rules like being able to control how many times you install it. Online activations and always on DRM. DRM rootkits that install to YOUR computer without your permission, without your knowledge and possibly interfere with the normal operation of your computer.

Do DVD's do this? Do CD's do this?

Other special rules like saying you are buying a "license" instead of a game. The disc is pressed and cannot be overwritten. The software is tied to the disc for the life of the disc and that cannot be changed.

Ever notice how Nintendo never claimed that your NES carts were only a license?

Further, they love to pull a bait n switch whenever it suits them. It's a license after you've bought it but before you buy it, it's a game. When the disc is scratched, your license key won't help you because it's no longer a license when they want you to buy a new copy. So which is it, a license or a product?[/quote]

Limits on installs are FAR from unique to gaming. Microsoft Office has install limits. Adobe Suites have install limits. OS disks have install limits.

Welcome to the software industry, and welcome to the 1990s (install limits are hardly a new concept. You bring those up like a surprise? Really? Really...)

Our NES carts never supported online multiplayer, or any other engagement with the company after initial sale. Note the difference.

It's both. The disk is a physical object and therefore a product. The software contained is licensed. The disc is the means by which I am provided access to my licensed product. If you break your phone (i.e. something not covered under warranty) is it their fault then that you can't access your phone's software?

If I break a music CD and it breaks, is the music company obligated to replace the songs I loss?

If my router breaks and I can't access WoW for a month, should they have to refund my money?

No, of course not.

If you damage your access to the content, that's your fault, and they hold no liability to you.

And yes, DVDs and music DO have limitations. Can you rip any movie you want onto your computer? No. You have to get a digital copy of the movie.

Can DRMs sometimes go too far? Of course. And that's not right on the part of the company. But that doesn't mean that you suddenly get any kind of special access to their intellectual property.

 

[Asuka Soryu]

Trophies to me are like 1st edition vs unlimited edition in Yu-Gi-Oh! Pointless and unnecessary, no matter how many people make them out to be 'better' then the version without it.

The only time I like trophies are if they're humorously titled. But I've never once tryed to obtain a trophy for the sake of obtaining a 'trophy'.

 

[NaramSuen]

I think that this is a real missed opportunity on Nintendo's part. In my opinion, achievements/trophies are an added incentive to play through a game again, perhaps handicapped and in a way you yourself would never have thought of (i.e. Little Rocket Man). In addition, part of the fun of "casual" iPhone games like Angry Birds or Cut the Rope isn't getting through all the levels, but getting through all the levels with three stars on each level; you also happen to be rewarded for this behaviour. Players who don't like achievements would ignore them so it wouldn't affect their exploration or discovery which Nintendo seems to be deeply invested in. Also, achievements seem like a natural fit for Nintendo, you already collect hearts, coins and rupees, why not put it on a gamercard for your friends to see!

I also find it particularly amusing to see people with badges proudly displayed on their profiles saying they don't care at all about achievements. I think there is a word for that.

 

[deckai]

I don't like achievements, most of them are nonsense... too often the only reason of a achievement is to push a gamescore... most of them are only artificial playtime extender.

Achievements that reward you with something, other than a gamescore-push, are the only one I somewhat understand and kinda support.

So I'm totally on Nintendos side on this case.

 

[NaramSuen]

I think that this is a real missed opportunity on Nintendo's part. In my opinion, achievements/trophies are an added incentive to play through a game again, perhaps handicapped and in a way you yourself would never have thought of (i.e. Little Rocket Man). In addition, part of the fun of "casual" iPhone games like Angry Birds or Cut the Rope isn't getting through all the levels, but getting through all the levels with three stars on each level; you also happen to be rewarded for this behaviour. Players who don't like achievements would ignore them so it wouldn't affect their exploration or discovery which Nintendo seems to be deeply invested in. Also, achievements seem like a natural fit for Nintendo, you already collect hearts, coins and rupees, why not put it on a gamercard for your friends to see!

I also find it particularly amusing to see people with badges proudly displayed on their profiles saying they don't care at all about achievements. I think there is a word for that.

People have been collecting Hearts, coins and rupees for 25 years without the need of Achievements but all of a sudden it's important?

About the badges, I don't think you can turn those off so how do you know who is "proudly displaying them"?

There are four spots for badges on a person's profile, if a person chooses which four they want to display then they are proudly displaying them. If this person didn't care which badges their profile displayed, then everyone would be displaying the Make Yourself At Home and Face With A Name badge. Neither you nor I are displaying either of those two badges. Therefore, we must take some pride in the badges we have chosen to display. Honestly, I am a little jealous of your On Fire badge.

Achievements haven't suddenly become important, they have been important for almost the entire life cycle of the current console generation. Nintendo clearly felt they were important enough to implement them on select Nintendo titles such as Metroid Prime 3: Corruption, later Metroid Prime Trilogy and Wii Sports Resort. If they weren't important, Nintendo wouldn't have bothered at all.

 

[My name is Fiction]

Achievements help me make games last longer I just wish they could have an affect in game like in dead rising 2. :/

 

[Jaded Scribe]

snip

I never said that a company HAS TO support hacking/modding/cheating but they also shouldn't make it impossible or use punitive measures if you do. I did give a reason why companies should, it's good business to give people more reasons to buy games instead of less. Sega, for example, licensed the Game Genie seeing it as a benefit to game sales. After all, how could cheating on Sonic possibly hurt Sega's sales?

It's a kin to Nintendo coming to my house and taking away any DS game that I used an Action Replay on.

You seem to be arguing that if BioWare told you stop using mods, you would do so because the devs should be able to tell you what you can and can't do with a game.

It is my argument that when you buy a product you can do anything you like with it within the bounds of the law. Not the bounds of the devs, the law. I don't buy this "you are only buying a license" crap. When I rent for $3.50 then I am getting a license but when I buy I getting a product. The game industry is not special and they don't get special rules just because they make a product with 0's and 1's.

What special rules? When you buy a disk, it gives you no rights over the content. None. Zero. Zilch. You can do whatever you want with the disk. You can do whatever you want with the case. You can use the disk whenever you want.

You are buying a plastic disk. You are NOT buying any kind rights to the contents of said disk, outside of being able to use it in an approved device. DVDs/Blu-Rays have limitations in how they are used, and they have preventive measures to protect the contents of the disk. CDs do as well.

Video games aren't doing anything different than these guys. They just manage to piss off more people with the same limitations.

And as far as licensing, it's not as much of a bullshit case as you think. Considering they must actively support and maintain access to online multiplayer content, they HAVE to be able to set boundaries on how their software is manipulated, for the safety and enjoyment of their playerbase.

Special rules like being able to control how many times you install it. Online activations and always on DRM. DRM rootkits that install to YOUR computer without your permission, without your knowledge and possibly interfere with the normal operation of your computer.

Do DVD's do this? Do CD's do this?

Other special rules like saying you are buying a "license" instead of a game. The disc is pressed and cannot be overwritten. The software is tied to the disc for the life of the disc and that cannot be changed.

Ever notice how Nintendo never claimed that your NES carts were only a license?

Further, they love to pull a bait n switch whenever it suits them. It's a license after you've bought it but before you buy it, it's a game. When the disc is scratched, your license key won't help you because it's no longer a license when they want you to buy a new copy. So which is it, a license or a product?

I just also want to point out that most of the platforms that you keep citing as supporting cheats and hacks are around 10 years old. With the exception of the current gen consoles, and the DS and its later models, most of what you claim was bettered by allowing cheating (though only Sega, who has long since tanked as a console, is the only one that officially allowed it) all came out when 56k internet connection was still pretty standard (though many were in the process to switching to DSL), and technology was not nearly as far along as it is today.

Times change, the markets change, the technology changes. The industry is changing along with everything else in our world.

Saying that the NES allowed hacks, and was never treated as a license, etc, etc, etc is rather asinine considering the changes in technology, society, and our laws as we have progressed into the future.

 

[NaramSuen]

I think that this is a real missed opportunity on Nintendo's part. In my opinion, achievements/trophies are an added incentive to play through a game again, perhaps handicapped and in a way you yourself would never have thought of (i.e. Little Rocket Man). In addition, part of the fun of "casual" iPhone games like Angry Birds or Cut the Rope isn't getting through all the levels, but getting through all the levels with three stars on each level; you also happen to be rewarded for this behaviour. Players who don't like achievements would ignore them so it wouldn't affect their exploration or discovery which Nintendo seems to be deeply invested in. Also, achievements seem like a natural fit for Nintendo, you already collect hearts, coins and rupees, why not put it on a gamercard for your friends to see!

I also find it particularly amusing to see people with badges proudly displayed on their profiles saying they don't care at all about achievements. I think there is a word for that.

People have been collecting Hearts, coins and rupees for 25 years without the need of Achievements but all of a sudden it's important?

About the badges, I don't think you can turn those off so how do you know who is "proudly displaying them"?

There are four spots for badges on a person's profile, if a person chooses which four they want to display then they are proudly displaying them. If this person didn't care which badges their profile displayed, then everyone would be displaying the Make Yourself At Home and Face With A Name badge. Neither you nor I are displaying either of those two badges. Therefore, we must take some pride in the badges we have chosen to display. Honestly, I am a little jealous of your On Fire badge.

Achievements haven't suddenly become important, they have been important for almost the entire life cycle of the current console generation. Nintendo clearly felt they were important enough to implement them on select Nintendo titles such as Metroid Prime 3: Corruption, later Metroid Prime Trilogy and Wii Sports Resort. If they weren't important, Nintendo wouldn't have bothered at all.

I haven't done anything to my badges and I wouldn't even know where to go if I wanted to, but I don't.

Anyway, putting achievements on some games is one thing, making it a mandatory thing for all games on the system to create a type of gamerscore, that's different. I don't think developers have a choice on the 360, they have to include achievements.

If you say that you haven't done anything to your badges, then I will take you at your word. However, that does not refute my original point. The fact that I found it humorous there are people condemning achievements while displaying achievements.

Nintendo doesn't need to make achievements mandatory, leave the decision to the developers and then consumers will decide. If achievements aren't important and gamers don't care about them at all, then games without achievements will sell just fine. I am willing to bet though that an achievement system would boost Nintendo's game sales.

I reiterate that Nintendo has missed an opportunity. Nintendo could have put its own unique spin on the achievement system, unlocking in-game content, sound tests, Mii items, you name it; no one said it had to be a raw number system. Instead, they have chosen to ignore what a segment of its market wants.

 

[whycantibelinus]

Oh and the Mushroom Kingdom is real and tangible? Same with the land of Hyrule? Jeez Louise! Nintendo makes me laugh.

 

[mattttherman3]

I think some are good, some are bad. Good: Beat the game on hardest difficulty.

Bad: Win 30 games of Caravan.

 

[kypsilon]

It's too bad achievements weren't attached to a point system or something that would allow you to spend gamerscore points in some kind of online store. Then they'd be useful. As it stands though, I'm on Nintendo's side here. Achievements are "mythical"...so are clothes for your avatar. Both I don't need.