I'd disagree with that, although I don't think achievement points should be chiefly used as rewards for completing games. There's no rule that says you have to only have one reward for each action - it's well-known that pretty feedback from constructive actions is considered a reward, and casual games lean on it pretty heavily. I don't see why achievement points can't be used like skill points are in the Ratchet & Clank series - to get people to go back to unlocked areas and replay them with a different playstyle. Or to try out the multiplayer. Or anything that isn't the 'main game' but is still kinda cool to check out.

I agree with you, Simon. It's not like these games are works of staggering genius: atoms of art destined to thrust the medium into the next millennium. At the moment, at least, these games are supposed to be fun, and how the player enjoys the game is up to the player. It's not much different than the kinds of meta-games players already invent apart from the games' formal system...except now it IS a part of the system. If the games were loaded with heart-plucking narrative or some other medium-reforming ingenuity, I'd understand the designers' wishes to keep the games pure. But, frankly, that's not what we're dealing with, now. It's more of a case of self-isolating penis envy. "If they don't like my game how it is, they shouldn't play it at all."

"I don't see why achievement points can't be used like skill points are in the Ratchet & Clank series - to get people to go back to unlocked areas and replay them with a different playstyle."

You nailed that right on the head. It actually makes me play games more and in different ways. What could be wrong with that?

All games have these extra pointsystems. Ratchet is a great example. What's wrong with adding another one. It only extends teh replay value. You don't ahve to collect them, it's entirly optional.

I wouldn't complete a crap game beacuse of achievements, but I would play a ggreta game more if it had. Just because there's more to get.

He's right. Achievements are just a real cheap way to extend games by appealing to your ridiculous ego.

Yes, you might try and complete the game using only your knife and the power of smell, but it takes achievement points and bragging rights as a carrot for you to do so, then it's not really going to be fun is it?

I don't actually mind new gameplay ideas included in the game, but why is it tied to an arbitrary points value? It's being used to sell overpriced downloadable content too, trying to hide the lack of value with ridiculous penis-size points.

And don't get me started on shitty multiplayer unlockables a la Battlefield. Way to introduce the MMO grind into action orientated gameplay, because you can't design a game engaging enough without having to dick along players with the pathetic sense of achievement after gaining the pistol+1.

Every now and then I'll try to earn an achievement, but not usually. I just play the games and should I unlock an achievement or two during the process, it's more of a neat bonus than anything else.

Related example:

I was upset that Halo 2 did not display medals to show if you had beaten a level on normal, heroic or legendary -- as was the case in Halo:CE.

Certainly people do go out of the normal gameplay realm to hunt achievements. I personally enjoy having them more as a testiment to all the time I put in to these games.

Does it stroke my ego a little? Sure, but if I'm able to slog through every quest in Oblivion or conquer Insane mode in Gears of War, I want to have proof.

Lex makes a great point about the Skill Points in the Ratchet & Clank series. I finished each game 100% because the rewards for earning all the Skill Points, in addition to bolts, etc, were some of the best ever in any video game.

In each title finishing the game 100% unlocked a special location in the game - a virtual tour of Insomniac Games.

In these spaces, gamers can hear commentary about features of the game, including some that didn't make the cut. Gamers could also view 3d models, play with weapons, and even tweak parameters on particle systems and other effects.

As an fan of that series, I thought it was incredibly cool to be rewarded with a behind-the-scenes look into the games.

Like Mister Raroo said it's proof that I did something. How many time have you played a game, beat it and went back through and tried to do something crazy like Jump really high, or throw something really far? To me I think its cool to have proof that I did it. Do you have to do it...No but you have the option. And about the skill point system you can have both, achievements are extra. There is nothing on the box that says the game won't work unless you complete the achievement list. And to add fuel to this fire a lot of the post seem to come from PS owners, in which I own one myself. Let me ask you this,if Sony started this system would it be ok? Also think about Home and how everyone is talking about the awards you can show off in a room you made. Is that any different?

The Skill Point system used by Insomniac Games in the Ratchet & Clank series can be considered a precursor to Achievements - as the requirements are basically the same. For example there is a Skill Point in Ratchet & Clank 3 which is earned by destroying all the slot machines on a certain level.

I don't dislike Achievements, instead what I liked about Insomniac's Skill Point system is that ultimately, the gamer was rewarded, with an unlockable feature, for earning them. If you earned the Skill Points, you earned items, costumes, and a pretty awesome ending in each game.

I like Achievements, but I would like them even more if ,more often earning them in a game rewarded the player with something for their efforts. Some games do this well.

Dead Rising rewards you with weapons and costumes. Most games only reward with you the bragging rights and Gamerscore.

For a lot of gamers those are enough, and that's great, I prefer those where unlock additional features and items.

Here's a crazy idea: Why don't developers intergrate the achievements factor from the littler games into the bigger games?

I know this isn't a relevant example but here goes: How about if you manage to reach level 50 of Joust LIVE, you unlock a hidden level or character for the next big FPS? Or a rare weapon for Mass Effect when it comes out?

Developers: Make Xbox LIVE work for YOU.

And what is Raphael Van Lierop doing to alter his view on gamescores & achievements. What is 3D Realms doing to change gaming on a global scale. It's easy to criticise but not that easy to be inventive. High Scores is completely what made games replayable originally at arcades. It just goes to show you that some people working in certain fields are clueless..

Nathan, Reese,

You may not be following this post anymore, but you're opening a whole other can of worms by asking for an incentive. There's been plenty of debate over the merits of unlockable content. Personally, I'm with you, I love getting a reward for my gameplay toils, but some people get frustrated that they're not getting all the characters or levels or weapons right out of the box. In that light, Achievements can be viewed as a sort of compromise.

This is an excelente site for creating our own exciting games for PC and XBOX 360.
Regards.-

Personally I love achievements - even as far as to say I am an achievement junkie.

Not being much of a gamer before the 360, I was often left out of certain friends conversations about how they had beaten a game on difficult and so when I got my 360 I wanted to make up for it and like someone said before - have proof!

I do find myself playing really lame games to get achievements (Avatar to say the least) however they I would never go out of my way to buy or rent these games - I'd sooner lend them or play at someone else house. And yes some achievements are seriously over/underrated - take the 1000G given from smashing the X button for 5 minutes on Avatar as opposed to the 1000G from completing everything on CoD4 which is solid - I should know!

Achievements are a great way to add a bit more game play to certain games. There are achievements available that would require playing the game differently to how it is meant to be played and I've often found myself returning to play older games that I'd lost interest in just to earn a few more G.

Some people admittedly do play the games how they were meant to be played and these people tend to be the people who kick your ass at an online game yet only have about 700G in total - they don't obsess over G. But that's their choice - if they don't want to rack up G then fair enough - but that shouldn't stop those who do like earning their points from having a great score system implemented into their gameplay.