It used to be about getting the full 1000 gamerscore in a game. Now, gamerscore totals appear to have lost all sense of structure.
I never got the point of gamerscore. I prefer trophies - they seem more quantifiable - bronze, gold, silver, platinum. But that's just me.
i like trophies better too, but im happy i just broke past 60000 gamescore, still addictive getting those achievements!
Meh. I like getting them because they keep me motivated to play a game once I'm finished with it. But I don't think there needs to be structure to them. you buy a game and it comes with 1000, then you get 250's for each DLC... I don't think there is a problem with that at all... if an arcade game is worth 200, then why can't a DLC be worth 250?
I've always hated the trophies/achievements as a form as a competition, but as extra goals to shoot for, I've always loved them. So, achievement, trophy, medal, badges....whatever, I don't see a huge difference.
Nothing wrong with friendly competition and showing how far you've made it in a certain game. I'm just not the type to get games like, "Miley Cyrus Sing-along" for Platinums.
because I love trophies. before, I just finish most of my games once and many times didn't even bothered going for the sub missions and stuff because I just want to finish the games. now, not anymore and I feel like I got my money worth it with every single purchase.
@thats_just_prime: Calm down young padawan, your insecurity is showing. He explained why he likes trophies better in his comment and if you still can't understand what he means then it might be you who is a fangirl.
I dont even have a plat trophy yet...
I prefer achievements because they are in all 360 games, and are therefore more quantifiable than trophies. Now disagree with me, fanboys :)
i used to be a cheevo whore like some of you guys here, i have like 60k but as of like 2-3 years ago i had an epiphany while getting the seriously 2.0 on gears 2 where i finally realized that achievements were the most pointless waste of time ever. ever since then i don't even look at the achievement list or care if i get them. good riddance :D
@thats_just_prime Its not the act that is any different its the reward.Trophies are a real reward you might actually have one yourself.Points are not really a reward. Its true they are basically the same things but one is actually something we have used for a long time as a symbol of achievement,the other is just a number.
I like going for trophies and achievements also. Especially getting some of the harder ones. I only have one platinum so far, but am more happy about some of the ballacheingly hard silver trophies on wipeout. As for achievs I am on about 55k now - finished a lot of games, but they always seem to add more and more with DLC - which has stopped me from being such a pefectionist.
gamerscores and trophies don't add anything, first I cared but now I don't give a s***, every time I hit the trophy-list by accident I smash the circle button repeatedly and never sync I'd care more about that, if you get something more valuable than a list of what games you played a what tasks you did/didn't
Dark_king how are "Trophies are a real reward" ? Does sony make real trophies and ship them to you house ? No ? I know sony send you a check every time you unlock one right ? No ? Well at least they give you free downloads for them ? No. "one is actually something we have used for a long time as a symbol of achievement" Hate to break this to you but achievements came abou 2 and a half years before trophies "the other is just a number" Actually you get a pic and a number with achievements. Some achievements unlock game pic and stuff for your avatar. Plus MS has had contest when could win others like free games for your achievements
wow not the sharpest tool in the shed are you.Trophies themselves are a actually physical real thing that human beings have used as a symbol of accomplishment for countless centuries. Hunter didn't keep a score card they kept a trophy.Which could of been many number of things a claw, pelt or fang.Sonys trophies are digital but still quality as a trophy a number does not.
To be fair, trophies have a MUCH better structure to them. Gamerscore could mean getting as little as 5 points or as much as 100. Trophies mean bronze, silver, gold, and platinum.
the point of the gamerscore is the same as trophies, its there more or less for bragging rights. and yes the trophy system may be better now but thats becuase it came out after, its unlikely trophies would even be there without gamerscore so you should be thankful.
Captain Qwark hit the nail on the head. ArchangelMike's comment of "I never got the point of gamerscore. I prefer trophies" is like saying "I never got the point of a landline telephone. I prefer a cellphone."
i believe in xbox 360's earlier years, you got rewards for certain amount of gamerscore...so there was a point to them before, now it really is more just for bragging rights
I've got to admit that it feels good to get these little, virtual pats on the back every now and then but I never put much thought into these. I did with achievements at the start but quickly found when I started playing the game the way someone else wanted me to play it, the games really lost something. I can't stand the myriad of pointless, frustrating tasks that you often find with achievements/trophies - things that simply aren't fun to do. And being someone who hates to leave things undone, often achievements at first would leave me feeling like I hadn't played the game even after I finished because I didn't complete these often mind-numbing checklists because they often just weren't fun to do. I wouldn't miss them if they just disappeared, but that's never going to happen now.
Games that I really lovr, and which have high replayability, I aim for the platinum trophy, and have great fun getting that platinum. To me getting a trophy is more tangible than getting just 1000 points or whatever. I personally just find it more... quantifiable thana nebulous number like 54372
Nothing beats the original, trophies are just a cheap last minute copy.
Goldeneye on the Nintendo 64 rewarded players who completed goals with guns, cheats & special modes, while Spyro 2 on the original PlayStation 1 rewarded players who unlocked 'Skill Points' with extra lives. These accomplishments really created the foundation of PlayStation's Trophies and the Xbox 360's Achievements Gamerscore. So I don't think you really know what you are talking about. But what do I know? That's just an observation of the biased uninformed crap you speak usually.
@Oner Goldeneye had its own system, and so did every games with "achievements" before the 360. The big innovation of gamerscore was not that you got rewards for doing stuffs in game... it was that all games used the same system, and that it was public, and easy to compare with others, which proved to be really popular... and that's why steam, sony, battle.net... copied it.
That's not the point. To say trophies are "a cheap last minute copy" is synonymous with saying the 360 is just "a cheap last minute copy" of the PS3's early design....oh wait it is since MS basically tried to copy it and ACTUALLY rushed it last minute to come out first (and we all know how THAT ended up)...but either way my original point still stands about they are not the "original". ;)
Where did that strange analogy come from ? Sounds like flamebait. Anyway, your point doesn't really stand imo. You either consider gamerscore for what it brought to the table, as in its universal achievements/points system with easy comparison tools, or you consider it for what it is made of, as in little rewards, and a score. In that case, you needn't even bother with Goldeneye, you could just talk about pong, after all, there was a score in that game too. But I don't think that's what people talk about when they say that Trophies are a copy of achievements, and you know it. (And it's indeed a last minute copy. Wouldn't call it cheap though)
And how often do 'cheap last minute' copies best or force the original to improve? Just because something was copied means what? Kinect was just a cheap last minute copy of the EYETOY. There are plenty of examples out there. Get off your MS high horse of pride, step down to reality, and realize that every company in the world does this.
I believe the early arcade games were the original so your right.Nothing beat having that top score with your name A.S.S. Funny how everyone did that is it not.
They are both the exact same thing. Anyway my gamer score is nearly 64374
Lol, thats the point... Any random number. How many 1000/1000s you got in there? are you the type that plays a load of games and complete a few or play less and complete most of them? Trophies give a better quicker indication at the moment. I thought the 360 crowd would of loved how easy sony made trophies even if you hated their guts;)
@Why o why Trophies come down to a number as well, whether it's how many total trophies you have, what your level is, or how many platinum trophies you have acquired. They're the same thing. On the Xbox dashboard, it shows you how many games in which you have full gamerscore. On xbox.com, you can sort your achievements by completion as well.
not quite There are many people who have a higher number of trophies than me but my Level is higher because i have more higher end trophies ie golds and platinums. I know you can sort them but its just easier to work it all out when its tiered. Nor sorting its just there, level 19 with x plats x golds etc so its not just a simple numbers thing. Like I said earlier give MS credit where its due but i feel levels, and the different trophies is a touch better
Well, tophies are just as flawed as achievements though. Some games give you several gold trophies for doing stupid things, while you can finish others and not get anything beyond a silver trophy. In the end, you can just as easily pick your games to increase your level or your number of trophies artificially. They are indeed almost the exact same thing... I wish the total score (as in 45680/85000 for example) or the icons you get in your xbox profile for having a 100% completed game could be public though.
@Aloren Actually every single PS3 title is given a TOTAL value that they can have, obviously Blu-Ray titles being worth more than PSN titles. That being said, devs are limited with how they can divy up the trophies. If they put in a lot of Golds, that takes away the overall total they can have, meaning FAR less Silver and Bronze. A rough valuing for the Trophy system is this (at least as far as percentage of completion for the individual game and levels are concerned): 1 Platinum = 3 Gold = 9 Silver = 27 Bronze 1 Gold = 3 Silver = 9 Bronze 1 Silver = 3 Bronze So if you were to convert every single title to say a bronze value, you'd find EVERY game more or less has the same BRONZE value (Blu-Ray to Blu-Ray and PSN to PSN). Now this gets more complicated with add-on content as it adds more trophies to an individual game and this add-on content is not necessarily weighted evenly across different games. Overall, the Trophy system is usually preferred because of its simplicity, especially when the number of trophies/achievements gets very high. It's much easier to say "OK, He's level 13 with 1200 total trophies." (with a Plat, Gold, Silver, Bronze breakdown) than "OK, he has a 45600 gamer score." Like I said in the example, LEVEL and number of Types of trophies can be seen on ONE SINGLE SCREEN in a person's profile. From this ALONE you can gauge a person. Due to the average distribution of Golds, Silvers and Bronzes and also that Plats count as completions you can quickly see whether a person is a completionist (a fairly linear distribution of all trophies) or plays lots and lots of games without worrying about completion (low plat and gold, VERY high bronze and silver). This all without beginning to look at their game list. Also as far as some games having easier trophies than others, that is COMPLETELY subjective to the individual. What is easy to one can be hard for another. In all my trophy-dom once you get to the 1000 trophy point every trophy of each type between different games seems to be fairly set difficulty level. Bronze = Very Easy to Easy, Silver = Easy to Moderate, Gold = Moderate to Hard/Impossible, and Platinum a round about sum total of everything difficulty-wise (ALL TOTALLY DEPENDENT ON THE INDIVIDUAL). Example, for someone good at racing games GT5 may seem easy, while it can be impossible for others (myself included - seriously GOLD on ALL events and license tests #*#$&(*&$(*#%& THAT!!!)
Yet if you finish U1 or 2 in hard mode, you get 2 gold trophies. If you do the same thing in U3, you get 2 silver trophies. The prince of persia trilogy also has 24 gold trophies. They may ave the same "bronze value" has another bluray, but still, the uncharted trilogy has 7 gold trophies and a gazillion bronze trophies. Do you think the prince of persia trilogy has 3 times as many feats that are worth a gold trophy ? I don't think it does... Similarly, Trine 2 has 11 gold trophies, Dark Souls has 2. To me, that shows that gold trophies are definitly not consistent, so in the end you still have to go check the % of completion in your trophy list to see what you actually got out of the total "trophy value" available for that game. It's no different from checking a gamerscore to see if a game has 5 200pts achievements or 50 20pts achievements. Also, I disagree when you say "It's much easier to say "OK, He's level 13 with 1200 total trophies." (with a Plat, Gold, Silver, Bronze breakdown) than "OK, he has a 45600 gamer score." , that's 6 different numbers vs 1. You may prefer it, but it's definitly not easier.
@Aloren Game Spawn used a bad word with "easier". They aren't easier to look at, but what trophies do is give more detailed information about someone's accomplishments at a quick glance. If you were to assign numerical values to the different trophies, you would basically have a copy of their 360 counterparts. Add that number up to a total, and you have a gamerscore. Having them be different trophies, rather than numbers that equal one giant score, gives one a better sense of how a person plays their games. I have a buddy who has the same trophy level as me, and roughly double the platinums. When you put our two cards next to each other, you know immediately that he is more of a completionist than I am. You also know, from that same glance, that I've played far more games than he has. There are some people who only count platinums when comparing trophies at this point. The levels also seem to be softer on the eyes when comparing overall counts with one-another. Not a big deal, but it is something that people seem to dig, the fact that a friend list can be scrolled through and ascertained by 2-digit numbers, rather than 6-digit ones. As for the consistency of gold trophies, the same inconsistencies exist on the opposite side of the pond, just in the form of numbers instead of trophies. It's moot, I don't understand why it's being argued. The general idea is present in achievements and trophies, of certain ones being valued higher than others. It's not always perfect, but it's an effective enough gauge, especially in higher levels. Unless there are people out there ONLY playing games with easy gold trophies. Bravo for them. Trophies are more advanced, but they are 100% inspired by achievements. I don't know why there is so much confusion. It doesn't mean achievements suck now. It also doesn't mean that PS3 gamers should sit around wondering what they would be doing without MS. Sony did to MS what MS has done to Sony and many others. And what Sony did to Nintendo after they bailed on their joint venture. What both Sony and MS (in a fashion) have done with Wii. And so on. I'm sure the next gen will bring significant changes to how both work.
@ FredEffinChopin Just to clarify something : I never said the inconsistency between the value of achievements didn't exist on the other side of the pond, I was just pointing out to those who say that the gamerscore doesn't mean anything because you don't know the value of achievements and you could pick games with easy achievements that you could "cheat" in a very similar way with trophies. Anyway, I got a gamerscore, trophies, steam and battle.net achievements... I like them all, but they're all more or less identical to me. Thanks for the discussion.
I completely agree... as an owner of both the Xbox 360 and PS3.. I find the trophies more satisfying over the gamerscore. your doing the same stuff respectively but that little *bing* when the trophy pops is priceless.
Trophies came around, that's what happened...Achievements are the equivalent of a USD...shit.
I wished that those Gamerscore actually added up to something worthwhile. Like MS Points. Would be super cool if I could buy new arcade games or Movies with gamerscore.
I agree Feels like you accomplished with trophies but just my 2 cent.
Why bring this into the Trophies vs Gamerscore again? I am now so over the gripes from both sides on this issue.
The gamerscore limit is kind of getting out of hand, Gears 3 is already at 1750 like the article says, and there is still more Gears content to be released. I still loving getting achievements though, nothing beats the satisfaction of that sound when you unlock one.
I don't get the point of setting any sort of minimum or maximum limits on a score for a game. That just forces developers to either add silly achievements or bump op the value of simple achievements when they don't hit the minimum. Or on the other side drop achievements or lower the value of difficult achievements because they are hitting the upper limit. They should just be allowed to do what makes sense for the game.
Actually I like have some structure to the acheivements. create guidlines so you don't get ridiculous things like we saw very early on in the 360 days where games were unlocking 250 pts for simple things like create a character.... That all said, the system on a whole is kinda broken now (see my rant below)
What happened to playing games you enjoy for fun?
I play for fun first, then for trophies if I enjoyed the game enough. You can have both as long as playing for fun is your first priority.
ahhh but have you thought about the people that consider unlocking achievements/trophies adds to the fun? (like me)
It is satisfying, especially getting a plat. But I want to play however I want first. Trophies often require you to do stuff you normally wouldn't do and if you focus on getting them from the moment you start the game, it takes away from a lot of enjoyment and fun you could be getting from the game.
totally agree with you. im not gonna lie, it has effected how i play. normally now though, i look at the achievements before playing and if it looks like they will change how i play, i will try to forget them until i have atleast played through it once. my biggest annoyance with achievements though now is the "collect all 100 of X" achievements. that definitely takes away the enjoyment for me as im constantly hunting in stupid places that dont reflect what im suppose to be doing.
Nothing. Achievments just ADD to the fun.
Sometimes they do, I have a friend who plays crap games he does not even like just for acheivements!
I hear what your all saying. But, unforunately the line between whoring and having fun gets blurred quickly.
I would say that achievements and trophies are the exact opposite of whoring. Without them you play a game and once you have "finished" you rarely call the game back up for a second date.
I've mentioned this statement countless times; and I still stick by it - I miss gaming BEFORE achievement/trophies. The one thing I can't stand is players who swear their "score" proves their a "gamer" and if your below a certain number your considered "Casual." Another piss off I have with the scoring system; a lot of companies use them as a way to make a bad game playable. Back in the 90's we didn't need Achievements or Trophies - games were that good where you WANTED to 100% the game regardless; now it's almost mandatory to put them in games just so people will play the games itself. Now before people start jumping on the "Hate" wagon I'm referring to games that people play just to boost their score - something like MGS4 proved Trophies are overrated and not needed; fans and people who enjoy it will play regardless.
"...something like MGS4 proved Trophies are overrated and not needed; fans and people who enjoy it will play regardless." Maybe so but it didn't stop people from screaming about wanting trophies for the game.
The only time I care about achievements is when I like the game and the achievements have some sort of challenge to them.
Bring back the highscores. A measure of skill, rather than, a willingness to grind.
they still have leaderboards man, dont know what platform you are gaming on. also certain achievements for singleplayer games such as those for beating the game on harder difficulties are an indication of skill as well ( although most do require just grinding )
i dont care about my GS i just play games for fun.
Same here mate, I sometimes aim for certain ones if they're cool, or if I absolutely love the game and play it twice, but during my very first play through of a game I just play the story, chill and enjoy. If I do go for a 2nd play through, this is then when I aim for certain chevo's or trophies, however I don't sweat my ass of trying to get them! Besides usually by the time I go through the 2nd time, there's another game out that I want to play.
I could careless about trophies and such, but they add some replayability values.
Still like them better than trophys, i mean its better to say you have 500 gamerscore than you have 5 bronze trophys 3 silver trophys and 1 gold but your also aiming for a platinum.
platinum trophies kills all talks
Waiting for you to stop talking then.
I like trophies more because they are divided to 4 different tiers and they tell more about how someone plays without going through the whole list.
_Aarix_ says he prefers GS over trophies.....¬_¬ ...shock horroz I used to be one of those guys that underestimated the added value achievements added to gaming and its added worth to peoples gaming accounts. Some of the ps community, myself included, were hypocrites when trophies were introduced. That being said I prefer trophies tiered plat, gold, silver, bronze system over GS's arbitrary number.. Sony learned off MS and added to it imho. You know just what type of gamer people are by their trophy breakdowns.
You would just say your overall level eg level 12 instead of saying I have sixty two thousand four hundred and sixty gamerscore