Serious disscussion: Game innovation features

[Fryguy64]

Why would you bump a topic with nothing to add? That's how threads get locked around here, my friend!

[Da Robot]

BUMP! (Don't worry Fry it has good reason).

After some time I decided to think of a good idea that also would help for some weekend discussion as no one seems to be post here on the weekend.

This week's topic (slighlty hard to describe) is game enviroments that had a serious emotional/mental (good or bad) on you. In some games there are enviroments that are nice, happy and pleasant to be in and then there are places that scare the heck out of you and you just want to get the heck out of there.

Warning! May contain possible spoilers.



One of the scareist places I remember in a game is from Metroid Prime 3: Courrption. The spaceship GFS Valhalla was a very, very scary place, it was dark, had dead bodies everywhere, had many weird creatures that I had not seen before, and made you wonder what the heck was going to happen after opening each door and really wanted to get the heck out of there.

Finally there were those darn Phazon Metroids that phased through the sealed windows. And then after defeating them I looked out the window and there were tons of them just floating outside the window (for some unexplaned reason, maybe a glitch).

[Fryguy64]

All of the Metroid games are masterful at doing that. You walk into a room - perhaps it's even one you've been in before - and you instantly know "something's wrong". I don't think any game has beaten the sheer atmosphere of Super Metroid. Hell, I was just listening to the soundtrack in the dark once and it creeped me out! Although I was possibly also inebriated.

Ocarina of Time had a few real "wow" moments, including the Gerudo Valley (helped in no small part by the music) and Hyrule Castle Town when you reawaken and find it in ruins.

For me, Twilight Princess managed to recreate that wow factor for nearly everything in the game. Almost every time you walk into a new area, you are blown away. In particular, there was one field in the game that I had managed not to travel along, and I came across it when hunting for Heart Pieces. It felt like I had stumbled across a secret place - and the best part was, the designers probably didn't intend that at all! It was my discovery alone.

You can't beat moments like that in gaming.

[Smashchu]

I think the levels I first connected too were those of Sonic 3 and Knuckles. After a level, you'd get a transition into the next level. To me, having not played super advance systems, it felt like one big adventure. That, unlike other games where you move from level to level with out a care, the world was all tied together. That Sonic and Tail were on this grand quest and they had to transverse all these different areas. That little charm is part of why I love the game so much.

The level that scared the crap out of me was Raven Holm from half-Life 2. Those head crab zombies made an awfully scary noise and the lack of ammo made it more suspenseful when I say one.

[Da Robot]

SERIOUS BUMPAGE!

(I can't believe how old this thread is . . . and also I mispelled the title "disscussion" with 2 "s" instead of 1).

I decided to bring this thread back after think maybe these forums need a bit more discussion going on.

---

So this weeks discussion topic is : Achievements in games: Good and/or bad?

Recommended reading before posting.
Here's the newpost that inspired the topic, Nintendo Belittles Achievements As "Mythical Rewards"
and "Achievements considered harmful?" article by indie developer Chris Heckler. (Has links to more articles about achievements as well including this good summary of the speech from Destructoid,

As we know achievements have really come into the light since the introduction of them on the 360, and then Sony implemented it's own system with "trophies" and Steam has achievements as well. While Nintendo has only had a few games with achievement like systems: Metroid Prime 3 awards, Wii Sports Resorts "stamps", and SSBB/Kirby's Air Ride unlock system (There is still uncertainy over what the 3DS has with it's game coins system.)

If you read any of the previous articles comments you would have seen positive and negative reactions to achievements, including the whole "they do nothing except promote an "E-penis" or "they make you do things in games that you would have never otherwise done" whlie others point out that "they have been optional the whole time."

So . . . Errr . . . Discuss?

[Shrikeswind]

I'm actually quite fond of achievements for the stuff you'd either never think to do (who in hell would attempt to nutshot 20 enemy soldiers to death if it didn't matter?) or that's incredibly hard to do. I mean, sure, anyone can headshot with a rifle, but it's rare and lucky to do it with a bazooka. So slap an achievement on it. However, getting an achievement for level completion is horsecrap. "Ooh, wow, he beat level 1. How incredible."

That's my take.

[Boo Destroyer]

It's not just achievements, but unlocking stuff in general, how to do it, and what you get out of it. There are many examples of each:

"Play X mode a large amount of times"
No no, don't OCD it in one sitting. This is one of those things where you'd have to just let it happen naturally as you keep at it. Don't even be concerned about unlocking it, just get to the mode whenever you want without keeping it in mind.

"Play X mode as every character"
Of course, worst offender is SSB, all three. Tiresome and largely ridiculous. Whatever I unlock out of fulfilling this (any game) better be worth it at the end of the day.

"Attack X enemy a certain way"
Now these are actually fun and worth going for. No need for unlocking something one by one with them, but if you can fulfill more than one of these altogether, then there's when a secret should come in.

"Clear X level"
Only if the level is really challenging.

That's my take on it. May add a few more later.

[Wildcat]

The only game I've really delved into that has achievements is Portal, and while it was a nice side-thing, I was more enthralled by the experience. So I can't comment more than that I play games not for "hey, look at what I've done" but more for the playing of it and getting all I can from it...if that makes sense.

Smash Bros. has an achievement-esque system I suppose, but that has more than cosmetic rewards, so I'm not really counting it (and I agree with you, Boo - All-Star in Brawl is taking me eons to do).

[Nester the Lark]

As someone who has never owned an Xbox, I didn't understand what achievements were for a long time. All I knew was that a lot of people were crazy about them and thought they were some revolutionary thing that Microsoft invented.

At first, I thought they were unlockables, and I thought to myself, "Unlockables have been around for years. Microsoft didn't invent them."

Then I found out that they don't actually unlock anything, they're just a little message that pops up to tell you you did something. And I thought to myself, "What's the point of that? You jump through hoops, and you don't even unlock anything for it?"

Then I found out that they contribute to a "gamer score" that accumulates over all games you play, and people just like having a high score. That's reasonable, and even true to gaming in a classical sense. And if people are having fun with it, then what's the problem?

I suppose the problem is that, along the lines of the e-penis argument, it encourages people to be judgmental of others based on an arbitrary number. If it's taken that seriously (and apparently there are people out there who do), then that's a bad thing.

Otherwise, it's just a trivial gaming element that some people can have fun with.

[Dances in Undergarments]

I like Achievements. Seeing that little Achievement unlocked pop-up and noise makes me happy. Personally, when I play a game, I don't look at the Achievement list for a while, instead I play the game and see what ones I can discover myself. After a while, I'll take a look into that list, and then perhaps make attempts to chase certain acheivements that I think will be fun to play. If I look at an achievement and it looks like more work then fun, then I don't bother. I wouldn't call myself an 'achievement whore' or anything - my average gamerscore per game is maybe a 100 or so, but then, I did download and complete all 200 gamerpoints of Doritos Crash Course, so, you know....

Achievements, in my mind (and as others have said), work best when they reward stuff that isn't something you should be doing anyway - so no 'completed level 1 - 20g' crap. They should reward things that are hard to do, or be designed to get the player to play the game in ways they may not usually. The majority of the best achievements do this anyway.

The other thing I like about them is it allows me to compare what I've done in a game with what others have done. Oh look, me and TEi have both killed 20 zombie hamsters with a shovel. How about that!

What I'm neutral on, however, is the score system itself. The scores become this supposed indicator of who is a 'better' gamer, and it just doesn't work well. Theres too many variables between games and how they each implement their achievements to successfully allow this to work properly - one game might give out achievements like candy, another might give them out like unicorn eggs. I'm not sure how you could fix this though, other than abolishing the score system altogether, and I know lots of people love the gamerscore system, and I don't really care enough about it either way for it to be abolished.

Going forward, however, there are some changes I would like to see made to the system. The first is that I would love that comparison aspect between the same achievement to be expanded - me and TEi might have both gotten achievements for killing those 20 zombie hamsters with a shovel, but he might have taken 5 minutes to do it and I might have taken 2 weeks. He might have done it in the Factory stage, I might have done it in Mountain stage. Include that info!

I would also like to see some actual rewards, too. In my mind, the next Wii has a built in Animal Crossing style Mii world, and achievements would be linked to that, giving you items for it. I think the 360 Avatars can, rarely, be given rewards for completing certain achievements, so this would be the logical extension of that.

[8bitretroshit]

I don't care much about achievements. Even if there's an unlockable reward attached to it as I'm not the kinda guy who 100%'s a game. I get to the game's official ending and usually move on to another game.

It's fun to see a notice pop up saying how I managed to sell over 10.000 worth of items or managed to blow someone's brains out while airborne, but it's not something I actively try and earn.

I guess the exception is the shit Valve used to pull where you could only gain new TF2 weapons by earning 25 stinkin' achievements per class. However the end result was everybody cheating their way to the unlocks by playing on special servers, not trying to earn them normally. The achievements were more of a chore than a fun little extra. Glad they changed it

[Fryguy64]

When first announced, I thought achievements were a genius idea. But then you started seeing the fallout extremely quickly. Namely:

1. Some developers struggled to include achievements in their games, and as such, some games didn't provide a challenge worthy of the achievements they awarded.

2. Gamer scores.

3. Achievements became a big thing for crazy people, who would actually buy easy/crap games to bump their "gamer score".

The first two points led to the third, so I'll touch on the first two.


Forcing developers to include a set number of achievements

I'm not sure why this is a good idea. Achievements are a reward to the player for achieving something within the game. Maybe it's completing the game, collecting all of a specific item, etc.

But when a game isn't an action title, including achievements can feel forced, and you end up with "clear x number of lines" or "play the game x number of times".

Now, other games are also guilty of this, putting an unlockable behind something that just means repetitive action. Super Smash Bros. Melee's Mewtwo unlock method springs to mind (play for 20 hours), as does Sonic Mega Collection's method for unlocking games (boot up each game x number of times). In fact, my Brawl stats still say that Mr. Game & Watch is my best character thanks to the CD Factory!!

It would be better if the developer could decide what achievements to reward, and how much of a reward they are worth.


Gamer Score

I play a crapton of games, but I'm not an "elite gamer". That doesn't mean I like it rubbed in my face. That is how I perceive the Gamer Score.

The reason for the Gamer Score is so people can show off their gaming prowess to their friends. Wankers. What I would prefer to see is achievements in individual games that are not only shared with my gamerscore buddies, but with my wider social networks.

I'd like it if the photo of my Mii taken at the end of Super Mario Galaxy could have been posted to Facebook or Twitpic, along with "Mark Kelly has completed Super Mario Galaxy". Make it an optional button. Most of my friends know I'm a gamer, but "Mark Kelly is a Pokémon Master" will take some explaining...

Each game, say, could keep a list of what it considers to be achievements that have been completed, along with "share with friends | share on social network" options. Then if I want to share it the next day, rather than at 3 in the morning when I usually complete these things, then I can.

Not everyone will want to see that I beat DKC Returns, but if I had the option of saying I beat Professor Layton, then I would be inundated with "How did you beat this puzzle?" (answer: definitely not GameFAQs *chortle*). That's what the gamer score should have been... a way for friends to share their gaming achievements, not a way to show off how many points you've accumulated.

[kirbychu]

This is where my girlfriend and I fall into different gaming camps. She's concerned with her gamerscore, and likes challenging herself to hit the next thousand before a certain date. I couldn't care less about the gamerscore, since it's just a number to me. I just want to try to beat every one of the challenges in each of my games. To see if I can.

Neither of us ever really show off our achievements to anybody, though, so the whole competitiveness thing doesn't really come into it. It's just all about personal challenge. I'm hoping achievement-type systems are going to make their way into more Nintendo games. Some of them already have similar things, like Brawl's Challenges. Those are even better than achievements, 'cause they give you in-game rewards.

[Da Robot]

Some good discussion folks, 8bit brought up TF2 troubling (set number of) achievements = unlock a new class weapon for you to use and of course all the players wanted to have access to those weapons as soon as each class update arrived (who can blame them?) the problem with some of the early achievements is that some required incredible luck/the right conditions to earn in the first place (Eg, as a Medic deploy 3 ubercharges in 5 minutes in the same life) and some even seemed depriemental to the current situation (Eg Ubercharge a Scout and get 5 kills or something, the Scout is a class you never deploy an uber on UNLESS there was absoloutly no other class eg Heavy, Soilder, Demoman, Pyro, etc, around and you were under fire). But as TF2 has progressed, more of the acheveiment requirements are getting toned down for the better.

I think I heard that some developers are more interested in doing single player acheveiments, than multiplayer ones, due to the single player enivironment being more controlled (and also probably for replayablitlity).



I'm not saying there's anything wrong with achievements, I like the ones that take awhile to get (Eg do X (being are normal part of gameplay) something an X (like 100 or 1000) number of times) and ones for doing Attack X enemy a certain way (as Boo DCR) posted, or an acheveiment that may get you to play a single player game or portion of in a whole new way,

(Eg: Half Life 2 has complete the Ravenholm level with only the gravity gun, HL2 Ep1 has beat the game and fire only 1 bullet during the course of it, HL2 Ep2, find the lawn gnome and carry throughout the game and place in the rocket)


An idea that I'm had is that games should have more in depth stat tracking, so that a playthrough can reveal every stat (like number of jumps performed, times died, shots fired, power ups used) so it would allow a player to create there own self imposed challenege (Eg beat Super Mario Bros without using the fire flower) and when they beat the game they would have completion screens that show lots of in depth stats (that could be saved/screencaped) that they could use to brag about their "own personal achievement."

[Fryguy64]

I'm all for challenges and rewards (even if the reward is just a message), but I don't think they should ever be relegated to the realms of crazy-skills-on-par-with-games-testers level.

"Clear the game without using the Fire Flower" is a prime example of this. However, I would all be for a challenge such as "Clear Level X (say, a stage that requires the Fire Flower) without using a Fire Flower". That creates a puzzle element - there must be a way to do it, but how?

In fact, that's pretty much what Wario Land Shake and Punch-Out Wii did. You'd be given little stage-specific challenges. More people will take the challenges and win.

Of course, this is assuming we're talking modern games. You could probably say "Beat Super Mario Bros. on NES without using a Fire Flower" and it'd be a short enough challenge to be possible. In fact, I'd love it if the VC provided a checklist of challenges to old games like that. "Beat Super Mario Bros. without Warp Zones" would be a good start. I bet some people have never even seen World 6!