Are the 360 Game developers finally making some of the achievements harder to get? I'm just having a look through some of the newer games released and they definately seem to be challenging. TAke COD 3 for example. Unlike the previous installment you can't get a full 1000 simply by playing the single player game through. There seem to be some quite tough one's like the multiplayer ranks and complete a level without firing a round(!!!!!). I'm quite liking the fact im games such as FEAR (not played this yet though) that you can't seem to get everything in one play through - kinda like DR. meh, i dunno, what you people think?
360 Achievements are changing?
- Thread starter suarve
- Start date
Yes finally they are starting to make it so that the full 1000 takes extra dedication and unless you love the game your unlikely to get it. Like marvel, you can get close but you would have to love replaying it to get 1000. GOW is the same 10,000 ranked kills.
Even fifa 07 now takes some dedication.
Even fifa 07 now takes some dedication.
cheets64 said:
I'mk sure some online one's are put there for a joke my the developer e.g. that one in GRAW playign for some many hours staight and the GoW one for 10k kills looking hard too. The only reason DOA4 isn;'t mentioned here is cause i actually like that game and the gameplay is top notch.
cheets64 said:
I agree with this a bit, dedication is one thing but things like 10,000 ranks kills in GOW as well as the host 1000 matches in GRAW take it too far imo. All achievements like this do is promote gaming the system as realistically getting them through normal play could easily take 500+ hours.
I like that they get harder, what i dont like it too much replay, things like Lego Star Wars + Marvel, where you need to play it 3,4,5 times to get everything, i also HATE ranked achievements, ill happily play multiplayer normally, but why have achievements in ranked games?
WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
It encourages boosting for one
WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
It encourages boosting for one
McDaniel said:
I'd agree with that. I dont think Marvel has a much replay just for the hell of it as Lego though. I mean you can play Marvel in arcade mode just for the fun of beating your mates to mop up the achievements you dont get.
Achievements are getting better because MS and devs are getting more feedback on which ones people like. MS had a very good white paper on the subject.
Some are really hard to get but then, so what? The idea is that getting 100% of the achievements in a game should be something that *very* few people do. They want people to play the game for ages, so what if you only get 95% of them. Big deal. The point is to reward those who keep playing games well after the first week of playing.
Some are really hard to get but then, so what? The idea is that getting 100% of the achievements in a game should be something that *very* few people do. They want people to play the game for ages, so what if you only get 95% of them. Big deal. The point is to reward those who keep playing games well after the first week of playing.
IMO achievements should be used to encourage players to try out all aspect of a game, giving them incentives to either complete the game, play against/with other people and tackle the side quests/story.
I dont see the problem with hard to get achievements, like some game's be #1 in the world, as people good enough to achieve this deserves the unique achievement/s.
I dont see the problem with hard to get achievements, like some game's be #1 in the world, as people good enough to achieve this deserves the unique achievement/s.
mcc49 said:
Yer there are others that are kinda silly, like one if NFS Carbon - beat a developer or the one in the new NBA game where u need to be online with 10,000 people at once. As for the #1 in the world thing you mention i don't know what game you're on about there tbh.
IMO a full 1000 should be available to everyone (inc normal players - e.g. not playing one game 24/7) who put in the effort.
I'm not one to buy games to get the achievments, BUT, I do feel like I get my money worth when picking up the achievements, feels like I have played the game to its and my full potential... 
Need For Speed: Carbon for example, I've completed 95% and have 0 achievments.
That's gay.
Need For Speed: Carbon for example, I've completed 95% and have 0 achievments.
That's gay.
andybtsn said:I'm not one to buy games to get the achievments, BUT, I do feel like I get my money worth when picking up the achievements, feels like I have played the game to its and my full potential...
Need For Speed: Carbon for example, I've completed 95% and have 0 achievments.
That's gay.
Yeah Carbon is really bad for this, imo a good chunk of the points should go to playing through the single player the first time. I understand giving points away to those who go online or run through the game a number of times but to most people beating a game once is enough and I think they should get a decent reward for that.
I also agree on the only giving out achievements for ranked games, its just annoying. It seems most people prefer unranked matches because you can actually play with your friends rather than random strangers, I think these games should count towards achievements.
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 May 2005
- Posts
- 12,631
IMHO, I think some games dont have a happy medium. DOA4 is ANNOYING with it's achievements... playing thru the game 100000 times to get all the costumes, with boring AI to fight against?
Several other titles spring to mind. I think some games like Oblivion and maybe Saints Row's aare good..
Several other titles spring to mind. I think some games like Oblivion and maybe Saints Row's aare good..
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Dec 2005
- Posts
- 16,215
- Location
- Paisley
Ive played about 20 + hours of tiger woods, doing all the tiger challenges, and im still only about 250 points from it, EA have certainly ramped up their points access.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 22 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 9,204
I like the way they are going. The achievement whore in me is not happy, but im glad the achievements are finally subduing that urge to 1000 each game. Im more relaxed no when i call it a day at 800 or something. Dont get me wrong, if i think i can do it (say complete a game on hard using only pistols or something) then i will goddamn do it, but i now refuse to sit in an online lobby for 3 days straight hosting games or racking up kills etc, especially as other people will have that achievement in a matter of time anyway.
Where is the prestige in hermiting away for a weekend for a long winded achivement when some 6 year old will get it in 2 months time because he only has 1 game anyway?>!?!
Where is the prestige in hermiting away for a weekend for a long winded achivement when some 6 year old will get it in 2 months time because he only has 1 game anyway?>!?!