The Achievements/Trophies Thread

Morning gentlemen (and women) of Amazon!

After watching yet another peferfectly innocent thread yesterday deteriorate in an argument I thought it would be a good idea to have a thread dedicated to achievements/trophies.

I think most of you will know the thread I am referring to which got a bit heated, due in part to some rather pointless and quite frankly absurd assumptions from one M.Deakin.

Having read through the thread today it was clear to me that some of the regulars in between the arguments had some worthy posts which which would make a good discussion.

Achievments and trophies mean different things to different people. Like it or not they appear to he be here to stay and will most likely be incorporated into future gen consoles in some way shape or form.

Personally I like collecting achievments on my 360. Achievements to me are exactly that, a record of achievments. it can give me a quick snapshot of how many games I have played and how much I played them. I like trying to earn achievements and they have certainly stretched a games appeal for me. This gen I have completed far more games than I have ever done in the past and played individual games for longer because of achievments.

Do achievements represent someones skill at gaming, yes and no. Whilst it is easy to rack up a decent overall gamerscore by simply playing loads of games and just playing a few levels then putting them down to play something else this takes no skill. On the other hand some achievments require a lot of skill, take the mile high club achievement on COD4 as an example.

I am far more impressed with a persons gamerscore when I look at the individual games on their gamercard than the overall number. 2 people I chat and game with regularly in the 360 clan, Rich and Davy have lower overall scores than me but if you look at their games they have maxed out almost everything they've played and this includes the 2 Mass Effect games, Fallout 3 (including all DLC) Fable 3 Dragon Age and many more games which I would consider either very time comsuming and very tough, this is impressive. Some of the games mentioned would require multiple playthroughs and on the hardest difficulty settings so it's not just a case of 'anyone can have a good gamerscore by putting time in' their is also a skill element to getting these achievments.

I have many more examples but would be interested in a sensible and healthy debate as to how others feel about achievements/trophies. We won't all agree but so what, this is a forum for debate.

I too am more impressed by people's gaming efforts by looking at individual games - I would be infinitely more impressed by someone at level 6 who had the Platinum trophy on Wipeout HD, MotorStorm: PR or Demon's Souls than I would at someone who was on level 16 but had loads of it bolstered out by Hannah Montanna, Wall-E and whatever.

I like trophies, but tend to only really bother with them if the bulk of them are achieveable without an absurd number of hours' work, or if they're for games I really like (i.e. my two Platinums are ACII & Uncharted 2). I often like comparing mine to other people on my friends list, and there's a couple of people at very similar levels who obviously have very similar tastes to myself.

For me it all started with halo - I remember getting those emblems with the legendary playthrough and having them all kind of cemented the achievment. Having both machines means that my trochievments tend not to be mega high so I tend to focus on particular games - mostly though I just play and whatever I unlock is the record of that particular game. Overall I think they are one of the best inovatations in recent years.

Would you both agree then that achievements/trophies have extended a games life. ACII for example, whilst it was a straighforward platinum it must have still took a bit of time. I gave that game around 20ish hours on the 360 and ended up with 960g, I only missed the feathers achievement and the wearing of the cape acheivment which you get when you did all the feathers. I gave up on the feathers due to time and wanting to play others games.

I think they are a good addition this generation.

I only have a score of 24 odd thousand, but I have played avatar (not the Cameron film spin-off) for easy GS, but that is due to a competition I have been having with a mate for the past two years.

I think they also add something to the game. Some of them are ridiculous, for instance you get an achievement just for walking to a certain area of the map, and this 'carrot' approach I don't particularly like. I think that if you go to a far off distant place in a game, like GTA or Fallout 3 you shouldn't get an achievement, but perhaps find a rare gun, or a piece of armour. Some games get this wrong, but this is just my opinion, I don't like games that you just get all the points in one play-through. I like the challenge of having to do a second playthrough, and the difficulty of trying to achieve certain achievements, the easy points devalue the harder points value.

On the other hand achievements that add something to the game are often good fun and add a challenge to the game. For example the gnome achievement on the Orange Box is a true testament to great skill and tenaciousness. Also an achievement for, say, killing something in a certain way is entertaining, and perhaps gets you to play the game slightly differently from how you would normally play it. Due to the ease of comparison, it can lead to more competitive play, especially if you have a particular friend on your list that you compare yourself to.

On the whole, I love achievements, I get pleasure from hearing the *ping* as you unlock a new one and is slightly addictive.

I've probably said all I can on the matter in one of the many other threads on the topic, so I won't retread old ground.

All I can really say is that I know I've wh*red plenty of PS3 games in my time and I don't regret that because it was addictive and fun; there was no other reason for doing it. I don't expect people to look at my trophy score/level/total and think 'wow!' - I do it because I love playing games. It's a lost cause trying to be at the top anyway, because there'll always be somebody with more time to play, or who's better at games, or that hacks/glitches/boosts their way through everything.

In my experience pretty much everybody goes through a period of being jaded with collecting anyway, either backing off completely or sticking solely to the AAA games.

i wasnt to instressed in the achievements when i first got my 360, untill about 2months ago when i started to chat to the lads on the amazon 360clan thread, my gamer score was only around 10k but now its 15499k, which is good for me because i have achieved more gamer score in 2months, than i did in 3yrs!! and the 9 came from G.R.A.W2!lol but i have been playing games since i was 5-6 so soon to be 20ish years!! i have never maxed 1000k on any game but i have came very close i.e- i need 1 achievement on ac2. but i'm not bothered about maxing games out, i have found that i am now wanting to max games out because of the lads i play with online i.e wayne, rich have massive gamer score's.

[Deleted by Amazon on 14 Apr 2010 13:56:02 BDT]

Trophy score is lvl 12 26%
Achievement score is 5610

I love achievement/Trophy hunting but sadly since I bought a 360, i've split my purchases so now I have to work extra hard to keep both up lol. I'm currently trying to 1000g Mass Effect 2 and Assassins creed 1

[Deleted by Amazon on 15 Nov 2011 18:49:24 GMT]

I've never been a trophy (level 9)/Gamerscore (10000ish) hunter but for some reason I have become obsessed with getting my first Platinum on BFBC2, just the damn demo kills to go but find myself playing more to try and get it so in a way I think they are a good way of keeping you interested in a game.

I am also nearly there for AC2 as well just 15 more feathers and the cape thing to go.

Yeah, I think that generally they're a good addition, although they can also be not so good for the completionists among us!

I think some games implement them really well, some are too easy and some are too harsh. I like it when the game forces me to play different to how I normally would - i.e. using varied weapons in Uncharted 2, or putting the effort into getting a certain number of stealth kills, that kind of thing. I don't like it when games force you to hunt out a massive number of ridiculously well-hidden items, like the pigeons in GTAIV or the diamonds in Far Cry 2 - in both instances you've have to invest several hours even with a guide.

I like games to have a mixture of as-you-go trochievements (i.e. for completing certain chapters or beating certain bosses), and elective ones you have to work toward. I'm not a big fan of online trochieves, but that's a personal reason as I don't play online a lot and don't like feeling that I need to if I want to get the game's trophies.

Anyway, I like 'em, but I try not to be too much of a slave to them. I won't play through a game I dislike or don't care for purely for the trophies, but if I like the game I try to get a reasonable haul (around 30-40% normally feels adequate).

I think achievements are a great addition to games. It really does make me aim to get them whilst I'm playing though them.

However, on my last Xbox I found myself developing this obsessive compulsive disorder where I would not put down a game until I completely owned all of the achievements for it. I hated that I did this because it meant that every game I was playing was more like completing a chore - a lot of the fun elements were killed. I particularly hate it when you are awarded an achievement for something like:

Dying from a grenade twenty times
Falling a thousand feet to your death but landing on a car
Being 'surprise attacked' 50 times.

I hate these because it makes you play the game in a negative way to achieve them.

This all said, I do enjoy them but I think they should program some logic in to it so that whatever achievements you get first time through a game - that's it!

Now that would be more impressive for me. If I read someones gamercard and found out that they were scoring massive amounts of achievements in that scenario then that would definitely show skill - because you wouldn't be able to get anymore on a second playthrough. It would literally reflect how well you did whilst put in the same competition with everyone else.

Unless a game has alternate endings, I will never play through more than once now to unlock further achievements. Sometimes I'll play on normal and then say to myself "well now I'll try that on hard" but that's not to get the achievement - that's simply to see if I can conquer the challenge.

To summarise - I think achievements are great but there needs to be more thought as to how this are rewarded. If you don't get them first time through, then you don't get another chance unless you play on another console or with a different profile.

I have had my XBox for 8 months and the PS3 for 2 months. I never thought about achievements or trophies and that people judge how good a gamer you are by these things. I actually don't know where my trophies are on the PS3, they seem hidden, but on the XBox it is more or less in you face with your GS displayed and your achievements easily visible. I just do not have the time to maintain a good GS or max out my achievement and up to now I've just played a game (sometimes even on easy), finished it and moved on.

There is one game that I have tried to get the achievements for "Trials HD" simply because it is one of the most addictive and frustrating games around, I have max'd out easy and medium difficulties, only have 50% silver on hard and have not completed one extreme difficulty game at all, just checked my GS on that, and it is 75 / 200. I simply cannot get it higher.

Achievements work best when the encourage new and experimental ways to play or add a meta-game to what exists. Whether through rewarding speed challenges, perfect playthroughs or anything else requiring skill. I tend to use them as a marker for how much my friends have played what games and certainly has helped as a buying guide for my brother as I can tell his tastes by what he's played the most.

I hate any achievement related to flags, hidden packages etc... Open world games use this way too much, it's just not fun hunting around every nook and cranny of a city or landscape for some poxy little trinket. It's an exercise in boredom/using a guide and not skill.

Without achievements I probably wouldn't have used every gun in Dead Space but am glad I went for the achievements as it opened up new strategies depending on load out and got my used to each weapon. That's probably a good example of one of the best aspects of achievements.

"Unfortunately I have sunk most of my time into COD4 multiplayer and there are no online achievements :("

If I check my stats for COD4 I have played for something like 10 consecutive days, lol!

COD4 was great which leads me to another sticking point, online achievements. A pain in the damn backside for a lot of games. I loved that COD4 and MW2 didn't have achievments to worry about but I (and a lot of other people) turned towards my K/D ratio as my record of achievement.

I* haven't played a lot of games online simply due the time it takes to get good as most games are not fun in the begining when your constanly killed online until you build up a level of skill. COD4 and Gears of war 2 are the only 2 games this gen I have devoted a huge amount of time too. Battlefield Bad company 2 will join them as I given it around 30ish hours so far. Cod 4 had no online achievements, Gears 2 had loads. Of the 79 available achievments for Gears 2 I have 76 of them. The achievments were time consuming and required me playing several different game types and increasing my skill in all of them to get the achievments and this was a lot of fun.

Some games like Prey for example were just plain ridiculous and other games which have the 'kill 1000 enemies using x weapon' really annoy me because I haven't got the time to dedicate huge amounts of time to online MP and will only do so for select titles.

I was never really interested when they first put trophies on PS3. When I had a 360 I used to be a bit more focused on achievements as, like someone else has said, it is more 'in your face' as you see it on the dashboard instead of having to go through menus to see it. Since getting a PS3 for a second time I have been more dedicated to getting trophies, especially the ones that require you to do something other than just play through the game. Maybe one of the future updates should be to add the trophy level and percentage to the XMB as there's plenty of screen space to play with. This might tempt more people into attempting to obtain more trophies.

I haven't platted any games yet (closest was 90% on AC2 - may have to rent it to get the last few trophies) as I tend to get distracted by new games. U2 was going to be my first plat to attempt but I have recently been distracted by BFBC2 among others, and finding the time to play is also an issue.
Multiplayer trophies / achievements used to annoy me, as before MW2 came out, I never used to play online because it was so demoralising to be killed every 10 seconds. Now I've got into the online side (dying every 15 seconds!!) I see the value in having these trophies to help keep the online community strong and plentiful for a longer time.

[Deleted by Amazon on 14 Apr 2010 13:56:03 BDT]

"I've never been a trophy (level 9)/Gamerscore (10000ish) hunter but for some reason I have become obsessed with getting my first Platinum on BFBC2,"

A great example masked monkey man of how achievments can drive us to want to play a game longer. I feel that I have had more value for money from games this generation as I have played them for longer to gain a few extra achievment points. When a game as good as COD4 comes along with no achievments online I can still be lured to a game simply by how good it is.

Off Topic: Can I ask the RATS what the reference to Monkeys is all about. Seen loads of peoples names change to reflect stuff to do with monkeys, just curious.

"Off Topic: Can I ask the RATS what the reference to Monkeys is all about. Seen loads of peoples names change to reflect stuff to do with monkeys, just curious."

Wayne, we are building an army......

It started off with just one, and they are bringing new recruits in to the Simian ranks. Soon, this will spread and we will all become monkey-like (a sort of reverse of evolution). Some of us are further along that road than others!!

Regards,

MarmosetBarca

EDIT: You do know that your question is a potential thread-derailer don't you?

"I really like the 'challenges' in COD4 and wish they had made these into actual achievements."

The trouble with this Hugo and another sticking point to online achievments is how fair is it for people who don't have broadband. OK so most people do have it and the amount who don't is getting smaller but their are still a few people out their who don't have it so are online achievements fair?

Also I have been finding myself drawn towards single player games a lot more lately. I still like to get on Battlefield and have a laugh and Gears 2 etc, but I really enjoy a good Single player game and it's nice to know it's up to me to get achievements and I won't be hampered by some glitching/cheating online tw*t.

[Deleted by Amazon on 14 Apr 2010 13:56:02 BDT]

"I hate any achievement related to flags, hidden packages etc... Open world games use this way too much, it's just not fun hunting around every nook and cranny of a city or landscape for some poxy little trinket. It's an exercise in boredom/using a guide and not skill."

100% agree. The sooner this is stamped out of gaming the better, in my opinion. There's only 2 or 3 games a year where I actually care for the 'rewards' given for collecting everything. There seems to a hell of a lot of games this gen that fall into the same trap. If I do bother getting all of them, I'm usually bored of the game by the time I have, so anything you get for it often goes to waste anyway.

"The trouble with this Hugo and another sticking point to online achievments is how fair is it for people who don't have broadband. OK so most people do have it and the amount who don't is getting smaller but their are still a few people out their who don't have it so are online achievements fair?"

Maybe having a trophy / achievement for completing all offline trophies / achievements could sway this. It would be quite simple to have a different coloured trophy on PS3. Unsure as to what the 360 equivalent could be.

I find that achievements have added a whole other level to gaming for me. Before achievements I very rarely completed games. I'd play til I was bored and/or got something new.

Now though with achievements I think they give you something to aim for, and also an incentive to replay games or go through games in ways that you normally wouldn't. I've completed Gears of War 1 & 2 on every difficulty on my own, and also in co-op, partly because they're two of my favourite games of this generation, but also because there was incentive for doing so by way of achievements.

I think it also is good for friendly competition between friends, prime (no pun intended) example is Wayne & Rich.

The downside is you now get people who think it's the be all and end all, and you get people who think that their gamerscore/trophy collection, makes people stand up and take notice and think "ZOMG L00K AT TH3M!!!" and they get their scores by cheating, glitching and gamesaves.

I'm not really a fan of online achievements, as I think they can have a negative effect on matches online, e.g. people boosting or not playing properly to get an acheivement. I also don't like achievements which come from having played a previous game in the series or achievements which require you to have certain peripherals that you wouldn't normally want/have but thankfully I haven't came across very many of them.