Profiles Suck

General and high profile video game topics.
ptdebate1
Posts: 909
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Profiles Suck

Postby ptdebate1 » March 7th, 2015, 11:02 am

[QUOTE=ZetaX]You should be able to opt-out of either or both (profiles and achievments.) If everyone who wants to play a local multiplayer game needs a profile, it's a big 'ole pain when new people come over, unless you just make generic guest profiles. And achievements...if you need to "game the game" in order to get enough enjoyment out of it, then the game probably wasn't fun enough to begin with.[/QUOTE]

I take it you don't like scores either then, right? Achievements are just that--a metric of your mastery of the game. Earning them is a challenging metagame that many gamers take joy in--just like traditional scores.

User avatar
VideoGameCritic
Site Admin
Posts: 11009
Joined: April 1st, 2015, 7:23 pm

Profiles Suck

Postby VideoGameCritic » March 7th, 2015, 11:09 am

I disagree that achievements are like scores.  A high score is something you can strive to.  As you become skilled at a game, you high score increasing proportionally.  It's usually a good measurement of your mastery of a game. 

Achievements are just random milestones put in place by the developers.  They just pop up on your screen every now and again (often ruining the atmosphere in an intense game).  Heck, some achievements are just worthless, like playing a tutorial or using a character 5 times or whatever.

Obviously it depends on the game.  With Alien Isolation, a score wouldn't really mean much, so achievements make more sense (although I personally couldn't care less).

For a fighting game or shooter however, a high score makes a lot more sense.

ptdebate1
Posts: 909
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Profiles Suck

Postby ptdebate1 » March 7th, 2015, 11:27 am

You hit the nail on the head at the end of your post. For most genres today, a simple number isn't sufficient--at least not on its own--to capture the variety of challenges presented. I would argue that achievements are an apt system for all genres, however, because of their versatility. A high score of 10,000 can be an achievement--so can dodging a really hard enemy a certain number of times or pulling off a crazy stunt. 

I don't know what you mean by achievements being "random" and distinguishing them from high scores on the basis that the latter is something to "strive" for. I certainly strove and strove for the Dark Souls II platinum trophy for weeks. It was extremely challenging and tricky, and required a great deal of planning. As I progressed through the trophies, my skill also increased. 

Just a note: you don't actually have to ever see achievements if you don't want to. Just turn notifications off in the settings!

ActRaiser1
Posts: 2726
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Profiles Suck

Postby ActRaiser1 » March 7th, 2015, 12:06 pm

[QUOTE=videogamecritic]
For a fighting game or shooter however, a high score makes a lot more sense.[/QUOTE]

IMHO I never understood the purpose behind points in a fighting game.  You either win or you lose.  Ooh, I lost but got more points than you!  Um, right, and you still lost...

Maybe, that's just me though.  Maybe, if you're only playing against the computer hi scores matter but in a versus game, I don't see the reason.

my two cents

Oh, and gonna disagree on achievements being random.  It's up to the developers.  Some are darn right near impossible without a great deal of skill.  Look at the Geometry Wars achievements and tell me those can only be hit by randomness.  The achievements are based on score.  [smile]


ptdebate1
Posts: 909
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Profiles Suck

Postby ptdebate1 » March 7th, 2015, 12:09 pm

Nice job slyly playing up your Geometry Wars prowess again, ActRaiser [tongue]

scotland171
Posts: 816
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Profiles Suck

Postby scotland171 » March 7th, 2015, 12:39 pm

I agree with Dave.

Think of all the genres - solve the mystery, survive the zombie attack, get the 'package' to Colorado, defend the frontier against the Zur and the kodan armada, lead your band to collect the magic weapons and defeat the 1000 year evil, rise through the ranks of boxers/racers/etc to be the best, win the superbowl, etc. I don't see achievements add anything.  The mission and the criteria for success are already clear in video games. 

As you strove for achievements, your skill increased.  That's great, but did not need achievements for that.  Did Doom need achievements?  No, it used skill levels to great effect.  Look at a lot of NES games - they made you strive for skill by having no saves (not even password saves), and good level design.  One of my favorite game, Impossible Mission, is a platformer with a meta-puzzle and a time limit, no save points, no skill levels, no achievements, no score...just failure after failure until maybe one day you finally succeed and beat the game. 

So, maybe its generational, but I prefer how older games made you strive to increase your skill.



Vexer1
Posts: 883
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Profiles Suck

Postby Vexer1 » March 7th, 2015, 1:19 pm

I feel that games still do that today, but in a different way, achievements are not all "random"(though some do require a lot of luck, such as the infamous "Traced" achievement in Watch Dogs).


Dave1
Posts: 25
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Profiles Suck

Postby Dave1 » March 7th, 2015, 2:02 pm

I don't care about high scores or achievements, but I can understand why people like achievements. It's kinda like a record of which games you've played, and how thoroughly you completed them. And while some achievements are really stupid, there are plenty that are obtuse, or require skill and time to complete them.

If there wasn't an online function for multiplayer in most games, I wouldn't game with anybody ever. I really don't have energy or time to go over to someone's house to play games, or have people over myself. My friends and I all live on different sides of the suburbs of Minneapolis, and it's a pain in the ass to drive over for a gaming night when we all work different schedules. Plus, we're all married (and some have children), so usually when we do hang out it's as couples and we'd rather do other stuff rather than game when we see each other. I'm not big on social gaming in general, but when I do online gaming is the only way to go for me.

ptdebate1
Posts: 909
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Profiles Suck

Postby ptdebate1 » March 7th, 2015, 2:53 pm

[QUOTE=scotland17]

I agree with Dave.

Think of all the genres - solve the mystery, survive the zombie attack, get the 'package' to Colorado, defend the frontier against the Zur and the kodan armada, lead your band to collect the magic weapons and defeat the 1000 year evil, rise through the ranks of boxers/racers/etc to be the best, win the superbowl, etc. I don't see achievements add anything.  The mission and the criteria for success are already clear in video games. 

As you strove for achievements, your skill increased.  That's great, but did not need achievements for that.  Did Doom need achievements?  No, it used skill levels to great effect.  Look at a lot of NES games - they made you strive for skill by having no saves (not even password saves), and good level design.  One of my favorite game, Impossible Mission, is a platformer with a meta-puzzle and a time limit, no save points, no skill levels, no achievements, no score...just failure after failure until maybe one day you finally succeed and beat the game. 

So, maybe its generational, but I prefer how older games made you strive to increase your skill.

[/QUOTE]

Hi Scotland!
It's the fallacy of the single cause to say that because working for achievements helped me improve my skills, the achievements are the sole motivator for my skills improving. Dark Souls II--and many other modern games--are just as smartly designed as the great classics. Achievements aren't what motivate people to excel at challenging games, they're just a bonus set of objectives or "special" challenges that interested players can pursue.

Their existence hasn't changed the value system of game design at all. They haven't made "new games" different from "older games."


scotland171
Posts: 816
Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm

Profiles Suck

Postby scotland171 » March 7th, 2015, 7:04 pm

[QUOTE=ptdebate]

I certainly strove and strove for the Dark Souls II platinum trophy for weeks. It was extremely challenging and tricky, and required a great deal of planning. As I progressed through the trophies, my skill also increased. 

Achievements aren't what motivate people to excel at challenging games, they're just a bonus set of objectives or "special" challenges that interested players can pursue.

Their existence hasn't changed the value system of game design at all. They haven't made "new games" different from "older games."

[/QUOTE]

I like you.  You keep my logic on its toes.  

I was probably responding to the 'strove and strove' comment that yes, getting that achievement was the sole motivator for you at that point in time. The achievement you valued earning from Dark Souls II was an ultra rare ones. One you could really brag about bagging. 

Even if we accept those rare achievement are okay, older games did the same thing with bonus levels or bonus dungeons or replaying the whole game on a higher difficulty setting.  Now instead of that, you get a merit badge.   
 




Return to “Video Games General”