170°

Do Trophies and Achievements Matter?

Sean Mesler poses the question 'Do Trophies and Achievements Matter?' to the SpawnFirst staff.

Read Full Story >>
spawnfirst.com
moparful993581d ago

Do they matter? Matter is a relative term. Do trophies and achievement enhance your enjoyment/ percieved value of a game? If yes then they matter.

I know for me they give me a sense of accomplishment. When I meet someone new I see how my trophy score stacks up. With the advent of the rarity system that Sony implemented with trophies it adds another level of accomplishement. Getting a trophy that less than 1% of the gaming community has is a rewarding feeling.

admiralvic3581d ago

"With the advent of the rarity system that Sony implemented with trophies it adds another level of accomplishement. Getting a trophy that less than 1% of the gaming community has is a rewarding feeling."

I really wish Sony either had more precise numbers or gave me a better idea of what the real ratio is on some games. I know this might sound like an extreme nitpick (in a lot of ways it is), but some games have figures so low that they display 0.1% (Lost Planet 2's platinum is that low) and it could actually mean only 1 or 2 people have it, even if .1% could be as high as 10,000+ people.

moparful993581d ago

You're right there could be 10's of thousands, however it doesn't change the fact that less than 1% of people the people that played that game achieved what you did.. It would still be nice to know exact figures..

Ratty3581d ago (Edited 3581d ago )

Trophies are cool. Not necessary but neat. I'll personally only platinum games I really like.

Like you said it's pretty cool when you get a rare trophy.

Ozmoses3581d ago (Edited 3581d ago )

go to PSNProfiles.com if you want some serious trophy statistics

just type in your PSN name or any PSN name to see the info...

it breaks it down super crazy... time of day, day of week, Ranks A-E on game completion, how many trophies per month.. stuff like that.

THE-COMMANDER3581d ago

I totally agree with you, well said.

incredibleMULK3580d ago

Trophies are a waste of time. Platinums are good, they should give out gamer points and when u reach 100% or 1000 gamer points they should award you a platinum next to your gamer Id.

So if my name is velveta_ANNIE and I had 50000 gamer points and 17 platinums it should read velveta_ANNIE 17/50000........much better than name level 14 then clicking compare trophies, and waiting 3 hours for it to sync just to see how many platinums some 12 year old has. For all this "power" ps4 has how come it takes soooo looong to compare trophies?.....why is Xbox 360 with inferior hardware quicker at comparing gamer points with other gamers. Greatness awaits.

Smh.

moparful993580d ago

I completely disagree with you. When you look at someone's gamerscore it really doesn't tell you much.

Also 100 percenting a game on the gamerscore system doesn't reward you with anything signifying that achievement. With the trophy system you can easily see at a glance what level someone is at.

When you look at someones gamer card on PSN it shows you how many bronze, silver, gold, and platinum trophies they have. Gold and especially platinum trophies impact your trophy level much more than bronze and silver.

Sycing trophies is a pain and needs to be fixed but that is a Network issue and not the console so your snide remarks about the PS4 are incorrect.

I personally think that the trophy system is better than the gamerscore system but of course this is purely my opinion...

liquidhalos3580d ago

I never really cared about achievements last gen on my 360, however with the ps4 I've started to take note of my trophies, especially the ultra rare ones. I really like what Sony did with trophies, especially showing the overall percentage of players that have unlocked them.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3580d ago
Imalwaysright3581d ago

Not to me. I have a huge backlog and when I finish a game I just move on to another one.

yeahright23581d ago

Funny, I don't feel like I've completed a game unless I get all the trophies. I usually don't move on until I hear that chime for the platinum, unless of course a game has a trophy that is just too difficult and/or time consuming like the watch dogs drinking game, vanquish special challenges or metal gear solid 4's 8 hour don't move trophy.

Also don't bother with mp trophies as I'm more a single player guy.

Tetsujin3581d ago

I feel the same way, I've gamed before trophies/achievements existed, and will continue to game even after they phase out. I use them as a way to prove I've completed a game (or the storyline) however to boost my epeen that's what competitive gaming is for.

MysticStrummer3581d ago

Not to me. In my opinion they are a cheap way for devs to give the illusion of more content when in fact we're getting less than we used to.

JBSleek3581d ago

You think we are getting less content in games then we used to? Really? I mean I don't know what games you are playing.

MysticStrummer3581d ago

I don't know what games you are playing that you think we're getting more.

I've noticed two things in the last few generations…

1) Generally shorter campaigns

2) "Normal" difficulty is the old "Easy" difficulty

There are of course exceptions. I also don't count multiplayer as a huge percentage when I'm thinking about content. Devs provide maps. We provide most of the fun.

dillhole3581d ago

I think it's the opposite. I think that devs often spend a lot of time working on small elements, areas, secrets that 90% of gamers will never see. A trophy system is a good way of seeing at a glance how much of the game you have actually missed.

MysticStrummer3581d ago

The vast majority of Trophies/Achievements are easily obtainable. A tiny minority are like what you describe. There are of course exceptions to the rule. Most gamers who aren't what would be described as casual will earn many Gold Trophies.

JBSleek3581d ago

If you are comparing games from generation four to now you can easily see a huge jump in campaign size as well as scope.

Stop buying games with short campaigns.

MysticStrummer3581d ago

I've been gaming since the 70s. I have no idea what generation # this is. Just telling you what I've noticed.

Highlife3581d ago

@mystic
Then you must have been high during the 70's and 80's. Games were beyond short then. The early Mario games could be finished in minutes. All those old Nintendo games could be finished in an hour or so.

MysticStrummer3581d ago

@Highlife - I'm clearly talking about games since the start of the Trophy/Achievement era…

I'm not sure how that's not obvious, given what I've said.

N2NOther3581d ago

Shorter campaigns compared to what? Besides RPGs I can't think of any games from the NES/SNES/pS1 era that had long campaigns. And I can think of a ton of moder games that do.

MysticStrummer3581d ago

I'm talking about games since the advent of Trophies and Achievements, obviously.

Last generation compared to the previous one.

N2NOther3579d ago

Yeah, I just don't see it that way. Again, outside of RPGS and open-world games, campaigns have been about the same. Max Payne 2 was about 7 hours. I beat it in a day.

Kyosuke_Sanada3580d ago (Edited 3580d ago )

Wholeheartedly agree MysticStrummer. Unlockables and worthy New Game plus items were plentiful before the DLC wagon fully taked off with most companies using trophies to increase replay value instead. I'm not saying that they should disappear mine you but if I had to choose between unlocking a new character, costume, hidden boss or weapon in a game (single player of course) or a trophy, Ill go with the unlockables every time.

thricetold3580d ago

Agreed as well. These new gamers haven't a clue what we have lost since trophies and achievements came to be. Everything you do now for a worthless trophy use to get you something useful in-game that you now have to BUY ala dlc.

New skins, outfits, gear, etc, all used to be given in-game as a way to offer replay value. Not anymore because you all love to hear a worthless"ding"! they'd rather charge us because you all either dont care or dont know. Either way its the entire industry that has taken a hit because of it. And yes, MS started this crap just like they started pay to play online.

Wake the f up people.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3579d ago
3581d ago
Show all comments (63)
60°

Disney Dreamlight Valley teases part two of paid expansion

Disney Dreamlight Valley devs have officially teased the second part of the paid expansion titled The Spark of Imagination.

60°

Best Stardew Valley Farm Names – 100 Funny, Nerdy, Cute Ideas and More

Starting out a new farm, but need help choosing a name? Check out this article for a 100 farm name ides for Stardew Valley.

170°

Bethesda Needs to Reduce the Gaps Between New Fallout and Elder Scrolls Releases

Waiting a decade for new instalments in franchises as massive as Fallout and Elder Scrolls feels like a waste.

Read Full Story >>
gamingbolt.com
-Foxtrot10h ago

Microsoft have Obsidian but I feel it's Bethesda who just don't want to play ball as they've always said they want to do it themselves.

Once MS bought Zenimax in 2020 they should have put the Outer Worlds 2 on the back burner, allow Bethesda to finish off its own Space RPG with Starfield (despite totally different tone why have two in your first party portfolio with two developers who's gameplay is a tad similar) and got Obsidian for one of their projects to make a spiritual successor to New Vegas.

When the Elder Scrolls VI is finished Bethesda can then onto the main numbered Fallout 5 themselves.

The Outer Worlds 2 started development in 2019 so putting it on the back burner wouldn't have been the end of the world, they'd have always come back to it once Fallout was done and it would have been nicely spaced out from Starfields release once they had most likely stopped supporting it and all the expansions were released.

If they did this back in 2020 when they bought Zenimax and the game had a good, steady 4 - 5 years development, you might have seen it release in 2025.

We are literally going to be waiting until 2030 at the very earliest for Fallout 5 and all they seem bothered about is pushing Fallout 76.

RaidenBlack8h ago(Edited 8h ago)

Its not just only Todd not playing ball.
Obsidian have made a name for themselves in delivering stellar RPGs, but most famous once have always been sequels/spin-offs to borrowed IPs like KOTOR 2, Neverwinter Nights 2, Fallout: New Vegas, Stick of Truth etc.
Obsidian wants to invest more in their own original IPs like Outer Worlds or Pillars of Eternity with Avowed.
Similar to what Bluepoint & inXile wants to do or Kojima is doing (i.e not involving anymore in Konami's IPs).
So yea, even if New Vegas has the most votes from 3D Fallout fans, Obsidian just wants to do their own thing, like any aspiring dev studio and MS is likely currently respecting that.
But a future Fallout game from Obsidian will surely happen. Founder Feargus Urquhart has already stated an year ago that they're eager to make a new Fallout game with Bethesda, New Vegas 2 or otherwise. Urquhart was the director of the very first 1995's Fallout game after all.
And don't forget Brian Fargo and his studio inXile, as Brian Fargo was the director of Fallout's 1988 predecessor: Wasteland

KyRo5h ago(Edited 5h ago)

Obsidian should take over the FO IP. They're do far better with it than Bethesda who hasn't made a great game for almost 15 years

Duke194h ago(Edited 4h ago)

I disagree. Part of these games is the support for the mod community. If they move to releasing a "next game" every 2 or 3 years, the modding support plummets and the franchises turn into just another run of the mill RPG.

Make the games good enough to withstand the test of time, to keep people coming back to them and expanding on them with mod support.

--Onilink--2h ago(Edited 2h ago)

I dont think anyone is saying they need to come out every 2 years (not to mention almost no game is released that quickly anymore)

By the time Fallout 5 comes out, it will be more than 15 years since Fallout 4 came out (same with ES6 coming out 15 years after Skyrim). Even if you want to use F76 as the metric for the most recent release, that one came out in 2018. It will be a miracle if F5 comes out before 2030

The point is that for a studio that doesnt seem to operate with multiple teams doing several projects at once, that their projects normally take 4-5 years as a minimum, and that now they even added Starfield to the rotation, it becomes a 15+ years waiting period between releases for each series, which doesnt make sense. Imagine that Nintendo only released a mainline Mario or Zelda game every 15 years…

They either need to start developing more than 1 project at a time, let someone else take a crack at one of the IPs or significantly reduce their development times

Duke1937m ago(Edited 34m ago)

Why should someone else take a crack at one of the IPs? Look at what happened to Final Fantasy as a recent example - there is pretty clear FF fatigue setting in because they are now pumping out titles in the franchise every few years. Pumping out more games faster doesn't always make a series better.

There are plenty of options to make new games, not just create more titles in the same universe at a faster pace.

mandf2h ago

Yeah I’m going to say it, who cares about the modding community when making a game? Half the time developers only tolerate modders because they fix there game for them.

Skuletor3h ago

Yeah, let's all advocate for smaller gaps between series' releases, then we'll probably get headlines about how the series have dropped in quality and they could have benefited from more time in the oven. Let them cook.

SimpleSlave2h ago

"how the series have dropped in quality and they could have benefited from more time in the oven" So every Bethesda game then? Got it.

Listen, I would agree if this was about From Software or something, but Bethesda?

🤣

C'mon now. What timeline are you from?

Skuletor31m ago

Think about it, they're already bug filled messes on their current schedule, can you imagine how much worse it would be if they rushed things?

Duke1936m ago

I mean you aren't wrong. People are going to complain about anything

isarai2h ago

Hows about you focus on quality, just a thought 🤷‍♂️

Sciurus_vulgaris1h ago

Bethesda [or Microsoft] would have to reallocate internal and external studios towards fallout and elder scrolls titles. Bethesda has the issue of developing 2 big IPs that are large RPGs on rotation. If you want more Fallout and Elder Scrolls, development will have to be outsourced.

Show all comments (17)