The Game Effect writes: What the industry needs to learn is that just because a game doesn't have achievements doesn't mean it's not worth playing. Their existence in a game like Spec Ops is laughable.
yes they do. I hate them with a passion. There is no point for them
No they don't. I love them with a passion. They add many things to games.
I see where you're coming from. I haven't played Spec Ops: The Line, but it does remind me of the end of Fable II, where you are given a moral choice, and receive an achievement for your ultimate decision. While I agree it is a little off-putting to see a reward for what is essentially a personal choice with no wrong answer, I understand why the achievement is there, reason being the publisher wants us to explore every corner of the product they spent so much money having developed. That's why achievements are scattered throughout different game modes, online/offline play, etc. Personally I have never gamed for achievements, or trophies. In my mind, all they do is try to get me to play a game in a way I otherwise wouldn't, or don't want to. Case in point, achievements for collecting dog tags in Gears of War, or flags in Assassin's Creed. When playing a story driven game like that, it kills the immersion if I were to spend hours searching every nook and cranny for some otherwise useless item.
Some times they're more like a chore. Other times they lead you to things you'd never even know about. Hell, look at Dark Souls. Unless you have a guide for it, you'd never know about even half the stuff in the game as they don't out right tell you. You find out little bits and pieces about some things as you go, but you'd never know about half the optional stuff (bosses, areas, loot, lore) hidden away. And the optional stuff you do find, helps you understand the back story going on.
I think they are great because they add to a game. If you have multiple endings, you can earn a trophy for each ending. If hidden things add to the game, you get a trophy for that. Or simply completing a game 100 percent. I like it because it adds "depth" and play time to the games. Instead of playing through once and finishing the core story, you have to complete side objects or explore a little. Imagine someone thats like "I beat Batman in two hours!" you look at their trophies and all they have is the core story trophies and nothing else. To me thats a waste of a game. The only trophies I hate are "ads" (Get your friend to play with you!!) and "find all the painful objects in this big massive city for no reason other than a trophy" (Riddles or comic books that add something to the game I'm fine with, but 90 percent of the time its pointless) Or "play our dead online game" crap
I agree that they add to a game, but in too many cases it's purely cosmetic. Like, if you want me to go somewhere or do something, give me a reason other than checking an item off a list. That's just poor management of player involvement. If you complete a game and haven't really experienced it, as you put it, that is more a failing of the development process than the player or playthrough, in my opinion. There are too many games out there these days for me to spend extra weeks of my life completing otherwise unnecessary tasks on a list put together on a whim. If the game is good or immersive enough that I want to spend extra time exploring the world, that is a credit to the development process, but I don't cite a checklist of random to-do's as a valid reason for exploration.
I like them. Used to be I would play a game and love it but would move on because I had completed it and there was "nothing left to do". But then achievements opened my eyes that there was still more to do in some of these games. If I love a game I will now look at the achievements to see what else I could be doing with it even replaying it on the hardest settings for that achievement if it sounds like fun (keeps me motivated to do this because I have an achievable goal as opposed to "I just want to do it" and then quit when I hit the first frustration point). In in the past I would just beat it on normal and be done with it because I didnt see the point of beating it on the hardest setting. That being said I am not one of those OCD people that must get achievements if they are there. I rarely get the MP ones (unless they seem reasonable) and I wont go after ones that seem boring to me.
Ive always found that Halo managed to get fun achievements, by that i mean not just the standard kill 1000 enemies, But more like challenges for you to achieve, http://www.xbox360achieveme... Oh and it was glorious to finally unlock the vidmaster challenge Annual achievement.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.