Top
200°

Gamerscore Whores or Hounds: Who's Got A Life?

OXCGN asks are you a 'nerd' or 'noob'? Does a high gamerscore make you a "nerd" with no social life, or those with a low score a "noob" gamer:

"The gamerscore system with its achievement points or trophies has largely changed the way many gamers play their games.

Many gamers now define how good a gamer they are by that very score and gamers with low scores are often scorned as looking like (or playing like) 'noobs'...

Gamers with high scores are often seen as lazy geeks who do nothing else all day and have poor social lives."

The story is too old to be commented.
gaminoz2898d ago

I'm neither a whore nor a hound!

Seriously people who say you haven't got a life because you've got a big score or gamers who say a low score means you aren't a 'real' gamer need to get over themselves.

Some of those arguments in the article ring true though: sometimes going for points makes the game less enjoyable.

deadreckoning6662898d ago

Neither, I just play for amusement. Its cool to win but I'm certainly no trophy hound.

SonyWarrior2898d ago

since trophies came out i always loved getting them. Im lvl 8 with 1 platinum. I would say this is a high lvl and i have a life only play probably 4-5 hours a week right now too

toaster2898d ago

But I can see a positive side to them too. They give players incentive to keep playing and get better at the game. What I don't like is that some games give out achievements for doing the stupidest things (Madden06 I'm talking about you and your "Score A Touchdown" and "Get a First Down" achievements) and this leads to people abusing it. I know plenty of people who bought Madden06 just for achievement farming. It's ridiculous.

There are positives though. On Steam when you get an achievement most of the time you are rewarded with something. Like in Team Fortress 2 there are Achievement Milestones, and after each milestone you get a certain item. Sure it's easy to go into achievement boosting servers but there is no score (IE Gamerscore). There's just you, the number of achievements you have, and the number of items you have.

BadCircuit2898d ago

I could care less about points. I play games I want to play how I want to play them.

XboxOZ3602898d ago

As mentioned in the article, Ihave no time for score-chasing. They are there if I get them, and not fussed if I don't.

But those who do nothing other than find every one of them simply to show that they are supposidly better than others, is not much or a real gamer inmy eyes.

Yet someone who does play the game properly, takes the time and sincerly wants to get the maximum points and awards, then great. If they have a certain skill-set that is above others, then my hat goes off to them.

darkmurder2898d ago

Ive got a 30K gamer score and used to be a whore but now I only play every now and again

BadCircuit2898d ago (Edited 2898d ago )

Do you mean you only play games every now and again or that you only play for points every now and then?

My father used to really play some crap games to get points, but now he says it was a waste of time to get nothing real out of it.

I just laugh at him...I already knew that!

XboxOZ3602898d ago

You can still play games without getting scores/points.

I finished MW2 the other day, yet probably only got about 200 odd points all up, and only unlocked poss 1/4 of the awards.

Yet I finished the game to my satisfaction, but will play it again on different difficulties, and also use the opt-out on the No More Russian level to see how the game plays without it.

Even FPS's need not be so heavily Multiplayer Achievement heavy as so many are.

Look at Opperation Flashpoint 2: Dragon Rising, it has very few Multiplayer/online achievements, and is more aimed at rewarding the skill of the individual. Thus blowing the thought that all online shooters must be Multiplayer award heavy.

UltimateIdiot9112898d ago

I thought nerd imply someone who is smart not someone who has free time. Last time I check, trophies and achievements does not require too much thinking. A geek would be someone who's good with technology and a dork would be a loser. So I'm guessing, the article meant dork.

Show all comments (18)
The story is too old to be commented.