This topic is locked from further discussion.
Personally I really want an achievement system in an exercise game. I would like reasons beyond getting thin to keep playing those games. I want in game content to keep me motivated to lose weight. Even if it isnt a true achievement system maybe just trophies like in SSBM.
As far as the rest of the regular games go I suppose it doesnt matter to me all that much but if otherr people enjoy them and they don't take away from gameplay that might be I say go for it.
What do you think 20 years from now those gamercards people have in thier profiles will still be there? That will only happen IF Sony and MS decide to carry over achievements to thier next console, instead of making everyone start anew. Also you keep going on about online records to check in the future, records and achievements are two different things. Would you be happy if Nintendo had a system that said you got your 120th start in Galaxy on July 12, 2010 but you got no points or trophy for it? If not, then it will show you don't care about a record, you care about the vanity of a gamer score. Also no one said you weren't a Nintendo fan, I said the bulk of the Nintendo audience doesn't care about achivements, many of them like me who own all 3 consoles. I don't go for a platinum in all my PS3 games or 1000pts in all my 360 games. I don't care about the vanity of it all. Not to mention most achievements are lackluster and these are the same people who would be making achievements on the Nintendo console. All pro achievement heads keep ignoring that fact. Does it really matter the day you got your 50th kill with an AK-47, in Uncharted, the day you beat MW on hard or do you just care about the trophy that came with it. And those universal trophies= less in game rewards, that will always be my problem with it. The only benefit of the universal system is you can show off your gamer score of 60,000. Sepewrath
So, no online stats or anything I can ever look up to see what I did in SSBB in the future? Pity. I'd like online records so I can also view my achievements in the future, so they're very similar in this case. You, and many of the other anti-trophy people, continue to turn back to the "All you care about is the gamer score" argument, which is an incorrect assumption that can't be backed up. To date, I've only got the full achievement score on 2 games, and most I haven't even finished half-way. I've never known anybody that buys a terrible game for the score, I'm sure there are a few people that do it, but that's clearly being greatly exaggerated by the anti-trophy people. I don't care about the score, I just like accomplishing the achievements. Hell, a short single-player game like No More Heroes has no business being without an achievement system, there was SO much they could've added for that game's replay value. And unlockables, like new difficulties and characters, aren't going anywhere. Do you really think that if Ninty added a trophy system thatthat would mean you wouldn't be able to unlock characters and stickers in SSB? You can't back up that this "bulk" of the Nintendo audience has all three consoles, either. Looking at some of their games lists, that seems quite false. If the question "Would you want achievements in your next-gen console? Majority vote decides whether we do it" was posed to gamers, the answers would overwhelmingly be "yes", and I guarantee the Nintendo fans against it would change their minds at that point.
No there is nowhere online where you can get a rundown of what you did in Brawl, but you can turn the game on to find out if it really is that important to you. Because I find it hard to believe that in five years you will really be motivated to go back and check when was the first time you beat Crazy Hand or cleared All Star. I feel like that just an excuse to give you a reason to support the inclusion of trophies. I will also go out on the limb and say even if MS and Sony allow carry over of trophies and achievements they will likely not detail beyond the simple numbers, because that is what is important to the masses. And you say you just want to accomplish the achievement then whats stopping you from doing it in Brawl, in Metroid Prime, inNSMBin Galaxy? All your compaint has sounded like is you upset that you cant flaunt your achievements online, thats it.
Also you keep bringing up Nintendo, but the bulk of this universal achievement support would come from the same parties that use it on the HD system. The same parties who have made the rewards of the universal system taken precedent over in game rewards. And you mentioned NMH, well the in game reward in that game if you didn't notice was the true final boss fight and ending. Also a game having a 6 hour story mode is fine, as long as it has some worthless trophies? Are you serious? Also the bulk of people including myself aren't dead set against an achievement system, we just dont see it having any value to the gaming experience and I have brought up points as to what it takes away from games. I would rather keep my in game achievements over having 300 bronze trophies, and if you all cared about was actually pulling off the achievement, you wouldn't really care about having some online system to see them. Also the fact that you said you don't even pursue achievements, why would you want it so badly if you don't even use the one currently available.
...Also a game having a 6 hour story mode is fine, as long as it has some worthless trophies?SepewrathI'm baffled as to why people who share your opinion keep defending developers, saying things like "Implementing an achievement system means that they have to put less effort into the core game experience!" or assuming that a developer has to make sacrifices in order to implement an achievement system. Seriously, you're an idiot.
In my opinion if a developer is needing to make sacrifices in order to implement something as simple as a pop-up message for completing a certain event in a certain amount of time and adding an amount of points to a profile, or whatever the achievement may involve, they need to invest their money in a less intensive industry. It doesn't take much effort to think up achievements for getting a certain amount of headshots in a first person shooter. All I can say about people defending developers and looking out for their best interest is to stop trying to be their best friend. You're a consumer. Be a consumer.
It's the job of developers to create something that satisfies the desires of its customers. At present (as can be seen in the 360 and PS3) there is a desire for an achievement system in games - so implement one. All I have to say is that not implementing one is a mistake on the part of Nintendo or individual developers. If there is the possibility of being able to turn achievements off in-game, anti-achievement gamers aren't going to NOT buy games that have achievements... but pro-achievement gamers may be more inclined to buy games which might = potential sales.
Pretty much... stop defending developers! They get paid when we buy their software, and I'm not complaining when it has extra features!
I just want a system that's like the PS3's Trophy system.
No points just Trophies and the level of Trophy collector you are.
Replace the Trophy with Coins,Stars,or Stamps.
So, no online stats or anything I can ever look up to see what I did in SSBB in the future? Pity. I'd like online records so I can also view my achievements in the future, so they're very similar in this case. You, and many of the other anti-trophy people, continue to turn back to the "All you care about is the gamer score" argument, which is an incorrect assumption that can't be backed up. To date, I've only got the full achievement score on 2 games, and most I haven't even finished half-way. I've never known anybody that buys a terrible game for the score, I'm sure there are a few people that do it, but that's clearly being greatly exaggerated by the anti-trophy people. I don't care about the score, I just like accomplishing the achievements. Hell, a short single-player game like No More Heroes has no business being without an achievement system, there was SO much they could've added for that game's replay value. And unlockables, like new difficulties and characters, aren't going anywhere. Do you really think that if Ninty added a trophy system thatthat would mean you wouldn't be able to unlock characters and stickers in SSB? You can't back up that this "bulk" of the Nintendo audience has all three consoles, either. Looking at some of their games lists, that seems quite false. If the question "Would you want achievements in your next-gen console? Majority vote decides whether we do it" was posed to gamers, the answers would overwhelmingly be "yes", and I guarantee the Nintendo fans against it would change their minds at that point.
GamerForca
You don't understand that...
[QUOTE="GamerForca"]
So, no online stats or anything I can ever look up to see what I did in SSBB in the future? Pity. I'd like online records so I can also view my achievements in the future, so they're very similar in this case. You, and many of the other anti-trophy people, continue to turn back to the "All you care about is the gamer score" argument, which is an incorrect assumption that can't be backed up. To date, I've only got the full achievement score on 2 games, and most I haven't even finished half-way. I've never known anybody that buys a terrible game for the score, I'm sure there are a few people that do it, but that's clearly being greatly exaggerated by the anti-trophy people. I don't care about the score, I just like accomplishing the achievements. Hell, a short single-player game like No More Heroes has no business being without an achievement system, there was SO much they could've added for that game's replay value. And unlockables, like new difficulties and characters, aren't going anywhere. Do you really think that if Ninty added a trophy system thatthat would mean you wouldn't be able to unlock characters and stickers in SSB? You can't back up that this "bulk" of the Nintendo audience has all three consoles, either. Looking at some of their games lists, that seems quite false. If the question "Would you want achievements in your next-gen console? Majority vote decides whether we do it" was posed to gamers, the answers would overwhelmingly be "yes", and I guarantee the Nintendo fans against it would change their minds at that point.
You don't understand that...
You don't understand that...
- you are in a minority here.
- records and cosmetic awards are not the same thing.
- most gamers don't need to be carrot and sticked into playing games.
- a universal cosmetic award system...
- promotes lazy game design.
- is not good or helpful to all game genres.
- You do seem to be obsesed with cosmetic awards.
Burning-Sludge
So... please explain how you came to the conclusion that:
[QUOTE="young80s"] But its not a make or break addition, why would Nintendo force developers to add it if its not really going to affect sales? Its just hard to imagine someone buying a game or a system cause of achievements. It may give you personal joy but if it doesn't reflect a measurable change in sales then it just isn't worth any amount of time or effort on Nintendos part. I, personally don't really care that much but even with the extra replay value who would buy a wii because it suddenly has achievementsGamerForcaBased on your logic, Nintendo's efforts with SSBB's online were perfectly fine because its one of the greatest selling games this gen and adding anything to its bare-bones online system wouldn't have improved sales. Do you work for Nintendo? Because it seems that you're more worried about Nintendo's sales than you are of the quality of their games. I guess we do need friend codes, but don't need leaderboards/stats or DLC because Nintendo is selling well this gen, so it's "not worth their time." Ive already said that i don't have a preference for achievements and yes its not worth their time because it barely enhances the experience for those who do like achievements. If it doesn't sell more then there is no reason for them to put any effort into it at all. Also i never said ssbb was anything but flawed in terms of online. But it has nothing to do with learder boards or achievements, it has to do with the connection and such. I'm saying adding achievements wouldn't improve sales because not enough people care enough. If you felt strongly about achievements you would boycott games without achievements
[QUOTE="Burning-Sludge"]
You don't understand that...
- you are in a minority here.
- records and cosmetic awards are not the same thing.
- most gamers don't need to be carrot and sticked into playing games.
- a universal cosmetic award system...
- promotes lazy game design.
- is not good or helpful to all game genres.
- You do seem to be obsesed with cosmetic awards.
KiliK14
So... please explain how you came to the conclusion that:
not having the highest selling system is whats filtering out lazy developers
young80s
And if the Wii had implementation of an achievement system as a pre-requisite... where would the lazy developers go? They can either continue being lazy and find another console, or they can stop being lazy andimprove the quality of their games.:roll:
[QUOTE="young80s"]
not having the highest selling system is whats filtering out lazy developers
KiliK14
And if the Wii had implementation of an achievement system as a pre-requisite... where would the lazy developers go? They can either continue being lazy and find another console, or they can stop being lazy andimprove the quality of their games.:roll:
No, they'd stay on the wii because it has a huge customer base compared to the other platforms. They would still be super lazy and make terrible games. The 360 still has shovelware, just not as much because it hasn't sold enough. An achievement system would do absolutely nothing to change Nintendos current standing the only difference would be that this thread wouldn't be here. It wouldn't improve sales, game quality, internet quality, or anything really. Thats why there is no need for nintendo to do it. Im sorry if it upsets people but it clearly hasnt stopped you from buying nintendo products so why should they/I really care. I don't mind if they do include it because it wouldn't change anything for me. But I don't see Nintendo adding something that doesn't benefit them in the slightestYou don't understand that...
- you are in a minority here. because of the number of people with a Wii as their only console, correct
- records and cosmetic awards are not the same thing. nowthat's just being picky. records can certainly be considered superficial
- most gamers don't need to be carrot and sticked into playing games. who said they did? achievements can be something to do AFTER beating the game
- a universal cosmetic award system...
- promotes lazy game design. you can't back that up. :roll:
- is not good or helpful to all game genres. "almost all" isn't good enough for you?
- You do seem to be obsesed with cosmetic awards.You do seem to besatisfied with mediocrity. (yeah, I can toss some insults too)
Burning-Sludge
@young80s.. I still don't understand why you're arguing from a sales standpoint. You can't play sales.
No, they'd stay on the wii because it has a huge customer base compared to the other platforms. They would still be super lazy and make terrible games. The 360 still has shovelware, just not as much because it hasn't sold enough. An achievement system would do absolutely nothing to change Nintendos current standing the only difference would be that this thread wouldn't be here. It wouldn't improve sales, game quality, internet quality, or anything really. Thats why there is no need for nintendo to do it. Im sorry if it upsets people but it clearly hasnt stopped you from buying nintendo products so why should they/I really care. I don't mind if they do include it because it wouldn't change anything for me. But I don't see Nintendo adding something that doesn't benefit them in the slightestyoung80s
First: I have no idea about actual numbers (shovelware is subjective), but I imagine the ratio of 360 to Wii shovelware would be greater than 1:5 - the Wii is not outselling the 360 by the same factor. The numbers don't add up. The amount of bad titles on the 360 to bad titles on the Wii is hugely disproportionate.
Mindless assumptions yet again... contrary to what you think you know about me, the last game I bought for the Wii was Smash Bros. Brawl, when it released here in Australia in June 2008. So, here I am; the first specimen of a gamer who was a 90's child loving both the N64 and the Gamecube and being UTTERLY disappointed by the Wii.
An achievement system for the Wii would mean Nintendo would need better online infrastructure which would result in better online multiplayer experience... do NOT tell me that it wouldn't increase sales. You clearly have no idea about the current trends in the gaming industry - offline play is being phased out and online play is dominating.
Look at reviews of The Conduit for example... it was praised for its online and PANNED for its single player campaign.
The defining feature of the highest selling Xbox 360 games is clearly the online capabilities... games such as Halo 3, Gears of War 1 and 2 and Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare did NOT sell because of their single player campaigns. Get your head out of the sand... achievement systems require good online infrastructure. Good online infrastructure = better online experience. Better online experience = higher sales. The numbers speak for themselves. I'm sorry Miyamoto, but gaming with friends in the lounge room doesn't top gaming with friends around the world.
Note: I didn't say that Nintendo has crap sales.. I'm saying Nintendo can benefit from including an achievement system. Will Nintendo fanboys like yourself stop buying Nintendo products if it incorporated a good idea such as an achievement system? Please say yes. Prove to me your idiocy.
No there is nowhere online where you can get a rundown of what you did in Brawl, but you can turn the game on to find out if it really is that important to you. Because I find it hard to believe that in five years you will really be motivated to go back and check when was the first time you beat Crazy Hand or cleared All Star. I feel like that just an excuse to give you a reason to support the inclusion of trophies. I will also go out on the limb and say even if MS and Sony allow carry over of trophies and achievements they will likely not detail beyond the simple numbers, because that is what is important to the masses. And you say you just want to accomplish the achievement then whats stopping you from doing it in Brawl, in Metroid Prime, inNSMBin Galaxy? All your compaint has sounded like is you upset that you cant flaunt your achievements online, thats it.
Also you keep bringing up Nintendo, but the bulk of this universal achievement support would come from the same parties that use it on the HD system. The same parties who have made the rewards of the universal system taken precedent over in game rewards. And you mentioned NMH, well the in game reward in that game if you didn't notice was the true final boss fight and ending. Also a game having a 6 hour story mode is fine, as long as it has some worthless trophies? Are you serious? Also the bulk of people including myself aren't dead set against an achievement system, we just dont see it having any value to the gaming experience and I have brought up points as to what it takes away from games. I would rather keep my in game achievements over having 300 bronze trophies, and if you all cared about was actually pulling off the achievement, you wouldn't really care about having some online system to see them. Also the fact that you said you don't even pursue achievements, why would you want it so badly if you don't even use the one currently available.
Sepewrath
Ok, I don't see why they would delete our accounts on xbl.com, where we can see our achievement data. What's keeping me from accomplishing achievements in Brawl, MP, NSMB, and Galaxy.. Well, I got bored of SSBB because of its garbage online. It would sure be nice to see my unlockables online as well. Yeah, it sucks that I can't see it online, but replay value has been the core of my debate, and nobobdy has put together a concrete argument against it. Telling me "I don't need achievements to beat it through 3 times" isn't changing my mind, because I'm not you. I have long RPGs and sports games to play along with all my college work, so I don't have time to beat a game through several times if I'm getting nothing from it.
I still don't see how in-game rewards are being destroyed, adding trophies to SSBB unlockables wouldn't take THAT much effort. Your argument about NMH is honestly the worst I've seen on here. You get to fight that guy after collecting all of the beam katanas..Suda DEFINITELY would've left that out ifhe had to waste his time onachievements. :roll: The reason achievements would've beenperfect in that game is BECAUSE of the campain being so short. You'll barely have played over 10 hours beating the game twice, sure would've been nice to have some extra goals to do, no? Nah, those 12 hours were well worth the $50 even though I'll never get to see what I accomplished in that game (other than beating it), right? Anyway, give me your points to how it "takes away from games" again. Because if "we lose in-game rewards" is it, then I don't see any "points". I never said "all"I care about is pulling off the achievement.Two of my best friends from HS that I still game with are in the military, and that's our best way of showing off what we've accomplished. And again, twisting words.. I never said I don't use the achievement system, I definitely use it for games that I think are good for them (sports games, shooters, short single-player games, pretty much anything online/multiplayer-based), but I don't really bother with games like Mass Effect or Dead Space. Because it adds replay value to most, which is why it would be nothing but a good thing to add; ignore them for games it's not good with, adds replay value to all others.
[QUOTE="young80s"]No, they'd stay on the wii because it has a huge customer base compared to the other platforms. They would still be super lazy and make terrible games. The 360 still has shovelware, just not as much because it hasn't sold enough. An achievement system would do absolutely nothing to change Nintendos current standing the only difference would be that this thread wouldn't be here. It wouldn't improve sales, game quality, internet quality, or anything really. Thats why there is no need for nintendo to do it. Im sorry if it upsets people but it clearly hasnt stopped you from buying nintendo products so why should they/I really care. I don't mind if they do include it because it wouldn't change anything for me. But I don't see Nintendo adding something that doesn't benefit them in the slightestKiliK14
First: I have no idea about actual numbers (shovelware is subjective), but I imagine the ratio of 360 to Wii shovelware would be greater than 1:5 - the Wii is not outselling the 360 by the same factor. The numbers don't add up. The amount of bad titles on the 360 to bad titles on the Wii is hugely disproportionate.
Mindless assumptions yet again... contrary to what you think you know about me, the last game I bought for the Wii was Smash Bros. Brawl, when it released here in Australia in June 2008. So, here I am; the first specimen of a gamer who was a 90's child loving both the N64 and the Gamecube and being UTTERLY disappointed by the Wii.
An achievement system for the Wii would mean Nintendo would need better online infrastructure which would result in better online multiplayer experience... do NOT tell me that it wouldn't increase sales. You clearly have no idea about the current trends in the gaming industry - offline play is being phased out and online play is dominating.
Look at reviews of The Conduit for example... it was praised for its online and PANNED for its single player campaign.
The defining feature of the highest selling Xbox 360 games is clearly the online capabilities... games such as Halo 3, Gears of War 1 and 2 and Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare did NOT sell because of their single player campaigns. Get your head out of the sand... achievement systems require good online infrastructure. Good online infrastructure = better online experience. Better online experience = higher sales. The numbers speak for themselves. I'm sorry Miyamoto, but gaming with friends in the lounge room doesn't top gaming with friends around the world.
Note: I didn't say that Nintendo has crap sales.. I'm saying Nintendo can benefit from including an achievement system. Will Nintendo fanboys like yourself stop buying Nintendo products if it incorporated a good idea such as an achievement system? Please say yes. Prove to me your idiocy.
good online infrastructure may = better online experience, but having achievements does nothing to make online infrastructure better. Also I am very critical of nintendos online, it hurts them a lot, but achievements once again are nothing more than a distraction in that area. If you actually read ANY of my comment you would realize I am not arguing against online, im not even saying that achievements would hurt gaming. Im saying their is no incentive to include it for Nintendo because it won't make them any more money. Adding achievements does not magically make online better, it takes an effort separate from anything else to make achievements (albeit a small effort) and theres no reason a company would want to do it. Besides, how are you going to talk about "mindless assumptions and then throw down the "Nintendo fanboy" bull. Who says I am a Nintendo fanboy? I like some of their games, I think they have a good developing staff, and I think that their company is good. I also like 360 games and happen to be playing borderlands. I think in many ways the 360 is far superior. But enough about that. I'd keep buying games as long as their good and achievements really won't make a game bad or good. I actually prefer to play with my friends in the room but i will agree it is far superior to be able to play online because you can do it any time. I'd rather have the option of both Also, how are you going to talk about proportionality with shovelware when you don't have any numbers and are pretty much just guessing. The way to look at this is imagine you are a developer who wants to make a quick cash-in with low development costs. The 360 costs more to develop for and has less chance of someone picking up your game (both because of the casual base on the wii and because the 360 has sold far less). The wii has a small developing costs, a casual base and currently the stigma of having shovelware being very sellable on the wii. Its a no brainer. As a result any marginally intelligent developer will make their shovelware for the wii. I hope that you see past your previous assumptions in your post and that you don't go and tell me to Prove to you my idiocy.[QUOTE="Burning-Sludge"]
You don't understand that...
- you are in a minority here. because of the number of people with a Wii as their only console, correct
- records and cosmetic awards are not the same thing. nowthat's just being picky. records can certainly be considered superficial
- most gamers don't need to be carrot and sticked into playing games. who said they did? achievements can be something to do AFTER beating the game
- a universal cosmetic award system...
- promotes lazy game design. you can't back that up. :roll:
- is not good or helpful to all game genres. "almost all" isn't good enough for you?
- You do seem to be obsesed with cosmetic awards.You do seem to besatisfied with mediocrity. (yeah, I can toss some insults too)
GamerForca
@young80s.. I still don't understand why you're arguing from a sales standpoint. You can't play sales.
I argue from a sales standpoint because its the only one that matters when you are considering whether it will happen or not. I answered the original question but here it is again, I do not think that achievements add or subtract from games so I don't care if they add it or not. I am just pointing out that no one here has claimed to play games based on whether they have achievements or not so it can't be that big a deal. This is important because you and a couple others are making it sound like one while claiming that people don't buy games for the achievements enough to make a difference. If your claim is true, why is this a failing of Nintendo? Their job is to sell. If something doesn't sell more, why do it? You can argue that they have disappointed you a little but clearly it hasn't made any real difference and wouldn't make any real difference if they have achievements or notgood online infrastructure may = better online experience, but having achievements does nothing to make online infrastructure better. Also I am very critical of nintendos online, it hurts them a lot, but achievements once again are nothing more than a distraction in that area. If you actually read ANY of my comment you would realize I am not arguing against online, im not even saying that achievements would hurt gaming. Im saying their is no incentive to include it for Nintendo because it won't make them any more money. Adding achievements does not magically make online better, it takes an effort separate from anything else to make achievements (albeit a small effort) and theres no reason a company would want to do it. Besides, how are you going to talk about "mindless assumptions and then throw down the "Nintendo fanboy" bull. Who says I am a Nintendo fanboy? I like some of their games, I think they have a good developing staff, and I think that their company is good. I also like 360 games and happen to be playing borderlands. I think in many ways the 360 is far superior. But enough about that. I'd keep buying games as long as their good and achievements really won't make a game bad or good. I actually prefer to play with my friends in the room but i will agree it is far superior to be able to play online because you can do it any time. I'd rather have the option of both Also, how are you going to talk about proportionality with shovelware when you don't have any numbers and are pretty much just guessing. The way to look at this is imagine you are a developer who wants to make a quick cash-in with low development costs. The 360 costs more to develop for and has less chance of someone picking up your game (both because of the casual base on the wii and because the 360 has sold far less). The wii has a small developing costs, a casual base and currently the stigma of having shovelware being very sellable on the wii. Its a no brainer. As a result any marginally intelligent developer will make their shovelware for the wii. I hope that you see past your previous assumptions in your post and that you don't go and tell me to Prove to you my idiocy.young80s
Just so you know... I didn't post numbers because 'shovelware' is subjective. But for your information, I DID look up numbers and they're quite depressing... I'll post them if you want.
*sighs* I love it when people say 'If you actually read my post...' Right back at you. I never said you were arguing against online, infact I addressed your issue of sales. If you actually read any of my comment, that's what it was about. :roll:
Having an achievement system DOES require a good online infrastructure - or atleast better than what Nintendo has to offer. An achievement system means that you can look at the achievements of others on leaderboards and view their gaming history on their gamertag (or whatever the console uses) to check out the achievements they have acquired on different games. Nintendo can't do this because of their crap online infrastructure that requires friend codes to do anything. An online achievement system means that Nintendo would have to DITCH the friendcodes and employ a more truly online-play-against-randoms infrastructure. If anyone's played online, they will most probably agree that playing against randoms and shooting them in the face is fun. You can't do that to randoms when you need to acquire friend codes in order to play with them.
So here was my point.. that you missed. An achievement system means Nintendo needs to improve their online infrastructure. Improved online infrastructure means that Nintendo *will* have better online capabilities. Better online capabilities = increased sales.
How do I know this? Well, at the moment Nintendo has lost potential sales from me because I'm unimpressed with their online infrastructure. Had Nintendo had better online infrastructure I'd be more inclined to buy their games. Crap online = less sales. Good online = more sales.
My evidence is myself. So either, I'm right about good online infrastructure increasing sales... or you're talking to a figment of your imagination. Take your pick.
I argue from a sales standpoint because its the only one that matters when you are considering whether it will happen or not. I answered the original question but here it is again, I do not think that achievements add or subtract from games so I don't care if they add it or not. I am just pointing out that no one here has claimed to play games based on whether they have achievements or not so it can't be that big a deal. This is important because you and a couple others are making it sound like one while claiming that people don't buy games for the achievements enough to make a difference. If your claim is true, why is this a failing of Nintendo? Their job is to sell. If something doesn't sell more, why do it? You can argue that they have disappointed you a little but clearly it hasn't made any real difference and wouldn't make any real difference if they have achievements or notSo arguing from a sales standpoint aye?What you fail to understand is that adding achievements will not stop people buying a game, but it WILL encourage others who would otherwise NOT have bought a game, to buy a game. Once again, my evidence is myself... so either I'm right or you're talking to a figment of your imagination.Just to make it more clear... I'm not arguing that achievements in themselves will greatly increase sales, but rather the infrastructure required to have an achievement system will increase sales.young80s
[QUOTE="young80s"]good online infrastructure may = better online experience, but having achievements does nothing to make online infrastructure better. Also I am very critical of nintendos online, it hurts them a lot, but achievements once again are nothing more than a distraction in that area. If you actually read ANY of my comment you would realize I am not arguing against online, im not even saying that achievements would hurt gaming. Im saying their is no incentive to include it for Nintendo because it won't make them any more money. Adding achievements does not magically make online better, it takes an effort separate from anything else to make achievements (albeit a small effort) and theres no reason a company would want to do it. Besides, how are you going to talk about "mindless assumptions and then throw down the "Nintendo fanboy" bull. Who says I am a Nintendo fanboy? I like some of their games, I think they have a good developing staff, and I think that their company is good. I also like 360 games and happen to be playing borderlands. I think in many ways the 360 is far superior. But enough about that. I'd keep buying games as long as their good and achievements really won't make a game bad or good. I actually prefer to play with my friends in the room but i will agree it is far superior to be able to play online because you can do it any time. I'd rather have the option of both Also, how are you going to talk about proportionality with shovelware when you don't have any numbers and are pretty much just guessing. The way to look at this is imagine you are a developer who wants to make a quick cash-in with low development costs. The 360 costs more to develop for and has less chance of someone picking up your game (both because of the casual base on the wii and because the 360 has sold far less). The wii has a small developing costs, a casual base and currently the stigma of having shovelware being very sellable on the wii. Its a no brainer. As a result any marginally intelligent developer will make their shovelware for the wii. I hope that you see past your previous assumptions in your post and that you don't go and tell me to Prove to you my idiocy.
KiliK14
Just so you know... I didn't post numbers because 'shovelware' is subjective. But for your information, I DID look up numbers and they're quite depressing... I'll post them if you want.
*sighs* I love it when people say 'If you actually read my post...' Right back at you. I never said you were arguing against online, infact I addressed your issue of sales. If you actually read any of my comment, that's what it was about. :roll:
Having an achievement system DOES require a good online infrastructure - or atleast better than what Nintendo has to offer. An achievement system means that you can look at the achievements of others on leaderboards and view their gaming history on their gamertag (or whatever the console uses) to check out the achievements they have acquired on different games. Nintendo can't do this because of their crap online infrastructure that requires friend codes to do anything. An online achievement system means that Nintendo would have to DITCH the friendcodes and employ a more truly online-play-against-randoms infrastructure. If anyone's played online, they will most probably agree that playing against randoms and shooting them in the face is fun. You can't do that to randoms when you need to acquire friend codes in order to play with them.
So here was my point.. that you missed. An achievement system means Nintendo needs to improve their online infrastructure. Improved online infrastructure means that Nintendo *will* have better online capabilities. Better online capabilities = increased sales.
How do I know this? Well, at the moment Nintendo has lost potential sales from me because I'm unimpressed with their online infrastructure. Had Nintendo had better online infrastructure I'd be more inclined to buy their games. Crap online = less sales. Good online = more sales.
My evidence is myself. So either, I'm right about good online infrastructure increasing sales... or you're talking to a figment of your imagination. Take your pick.
I argue from a sales standpoint because its the only one that matters when you are considering whether it will happen or not. I answered the original question but here it is again, I do not think that achievements add or subtract from games so I don't care if they add it or not. I am just pointing out that no one here has claimed to play games based on whether they have achievements or not so it can't be that big a deal. This is important because you and a couple others are making it sound like one while claiming that people don't buy games for the achievements enough to make a difference. If your claim is true, why is this a failing of Nintendo? Their job is to sell. If something doesn't sell more, why do it? You can argue that they have disappointed you a little but clearly it hasn't made any real difference and wouldn't make any real difference if they have achievements or notSo arguing from a sales standpoint aye?What you fail to understand is that adding achievements will not stop people buying a game, but it WILL encourage others who would otherwise NOT have bought a game, to buy a game. Once again, my evidence is myself... so either I'm right or you're talking to a figment of your imagination.Just to make it more clear... I'm not arguing that achievements in themselves will greatly increase sales, but rather the infrastructure required to have an achievement system will increase sales. i understood your point, you are just missing mine. one big point i made was that they do not need achievements to have good online. they need good online to have achievements. see how that works? You have the relationship backwards and used yourself as an example (im not even going to go into whats wrong with using yourself), But you never say that you would buy a game because they added achievements only that you were disappointed with the online WHICH IS, ONCE AGAIN, A SEPARATE PROBLEM. you can have good online without achievements, in fact, achievements do nothing too get you to have better onlineyoung80s
clearly you read but i wasnt clear enough, and if you have the shovelware numbers go ahead and post, i already said that it really has nothing to do with proportionality so that point is moot anyways
[QUOTE="young80s"]
not having the highest selling system is whats filtering out lazy developers
KiliK14
And if the Wii had implementation of an achievement system as a pre-requisite... where would the lazy developers go? They can either continue being lazy and find another console, or they can stop being lazy andimprove the quality of their games.:roll:
Or they can continue being lazy and stay on the Wii. :shock:
Why does every argument have to belong to a faction or have a ludicrousagenda? Can't people have an opinion without belonging to a SWcamp or faction?Its really starting to bug me. Ive been posting on GS for ages now but Im tired of the pigeon-holing. If Im not a Nintendo Fanboy, Im a Lemming. If Im not a Casual, Im hardcore. IfIm Casual, I only play Wii Sports, IfIm hardcore, Im arrogant.If I wantachievementsIm not a gamer, Im a lab rat. If I dont, Im blindly following Nintendo and the "poor" third party support they ultimately must be responsible for despite not being in any way involved in other companies development.Where do you people get this nonsense from?
Ive bought and owned every single Nintendo console. Ive loved every single one. Ive also owned a number of other consoles, including a 360. While I can see both sides, there really is no harm in implementing an achievement system. Personally, I enjoyed it, and think that ultimately, if they increase replayability while giving the playerpersonal satisfaction, it is ultimately a good thing.I would at the same time, like devs to focus a bit more on achievements like you get in games such as Fatal Frame and Resident Evil i.e proper unlockables.But a system like this could work on the Wii if implemented properly, and boost the community aspect significantly.
Whether we getachievements on the Wiiis up to Nintendo. In a sense they have already given them to us, just not in the way some people want. To call a Gamerscore meaningless, yet enjoy earning trophies in Super Smash Bros. orto play through Metroid for alternate endingsis hypocritical, even if I do see Miyamoto's point.
I don't understand this either. I just play games on the Wii because I find them fun. That's it. I have no problem with the other systems nor do I need achievements. I am not against them, but I don't need them either.Why does every argument have to belong to a faction or have a ludicrousagenda? Can't people have an opinion without belonging to a SWcamp or faction?Its really starting to bug me. Ive been posting on GS for ages now but Im tired of the pigeon-holing. If Im not a Nintendo Fanboy, Im a Lemming. If Im not a Casual, Im hardcore. IfIm Casual, I only play Wii Sports, IfIm hardcore, Im arrogant.If I wantachievementsIm not a gamer, Im a lab rat. If I dont, Im blindly following Nintendo and the "poor" third party support they ultimately must be responsible for despite not being in any way involved in other companies development.Where do you people get this nonsense from?
Quofan
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment