avatar - 1000points in 5 minutes

  • Thread starter Thread starter rjk
  • Start date Start date

rjk

rjk

rjk

Caporegime
Joined
8 Aug 2007
Posts
25,380
this stuff really gets to me

i have had my 360 about 18months now and i must admit - i havent really ever got into this gamerscore boosting thing - i play games that appeal to me for fun - im not overly competitive when it comes to games

so i got R6vegas about 3 months after having my console - i loved the game - wanted to get everything out of it

got lots of points - got to elite in multiplayer without doing the points cheat thing
really proud - i never finished it on hard for the last few points as other games came along - and i wasnt buying the live vision camera for the other achievement

so i settled on about 780 points

pretty good going in my opinion. [especially for a good 8-9months time on one game]

so a while back my younger brother comes to stay for a weekend and rents TMNT
he completes it in a day on my xbox as he doesnt have one

i check and he has 1000 points - but its a game aimed at kids his age - and he worked hard on it

not like my 9 month slog in vegas but kids dont have that attention span i guess.

my friend emails me today

'i got 1000pts in 5 minutes'

on a game called Avatar

5 achievements - 1000 points - 5 minutes

thats criminal - im not starting a flame war on achievement grabbers - it doesnt bother me

but im thinking that microsoft need to balance the system out a bit

it would make people commit to these small title games more.

i just think that the lifespan of a game should be reflected in price
all games are average £40 but the lifespan of games do not reflect the price

no wonder there is such a high trade-in market for console games
 
Needles said:
Old:o
Click to expand...

i know the discussion of this game may be old -
MY POINT
is that why can publishers consider that 6months + work on one games achievements is worth the same amount of money as this?

6Months vs 5 minutes? at £40 each

i know which one i would take

im merely putting the point of VALUE in games across - which i think is a valid and important discussion - if you feel that my point is not valid then by all means - carry on with your dissmissal

and i will hold on to my nice cool 'pint of bothered'!
 
Simon said:
I just see it as a way of adding to a game you have. I like to get as many points as possible out of each game, plus it makes you do stuff you would have never thought about.
Click to expand...

i agree with that plus it gives you an incentive to up the difficulty and stuf like that

i just dont see why microsoft cant scale the achievement difficulty in accordance with the lifespan of some of their games.

i know achievements add a lot to games even for those who dont bother with them - i like to be surprised and get them for just playing

but a full 1000 points in 45 seconds or whatever just takes the longevity of a game and flushes it down the toilet

i just think more consistancy needs to be added to some games to help them avoid being dropped into the 'rent it to boost' catagory
 
Kyle009 said:
You say you are not bothered about points, but then you make a complaint about people getting easy points?
Click to expand...

im saying that microsoft need to scale achievemnt points to add value to the game

a guy in this thread said that he took the disk out after 2 minutes
that means that he didnt give the game a chance

my argument is not about gamerscore or cachievement whoring or whatever - [its peoples lives let them do what they want - an online number means nothing really]

but im trying to get the point across of microsoft needing to make sure that they check this stuff before releasing so that their customers see some kind of lifespan - it would increase game sales and then all customers could buy any game and think "great, im buying at least Xmonths worht of entertainment" - if you see what i mean
 
Last edited:
rp2000 said:
Avatar is the exception though tbh. The problem (if you can call it that) is that MS mandate that 1000 points are included with every retail title. So devs may reluctantly put in stuff that they don't really care about or doesn't add to the game. Conversely other developers will implement it better.

Personally If I had to pick I would say achievements work great in sandbox games (as a lot of those are exploration/collectible based anyway by design), And maybe beat-em ups and FPS games in terms of online achievements (number of wins, headshots etc)

In hindsight it is a masterstroke by MS as there clearly is a huge market of people who will buy rent games just to increase their score by up to 1000 points. I can see a similar system existing in the next gen of consoles, although personally I am not a fan of achievements they have proven successful so they ain't going anywhere fast, and we will see more titles with easy points to get quick sales.


rp2000
Click to expand...

finally - someone has grasped my point !
nice one rp2000
 
can i just try and reestablish why i started this thread

now just forget about gamerscore and who rents games and whatever

the point was...

should microsoft be more stringent in the allocation of gamerpoints in their games to increase the lifespan so the customer is garunteed Xmonths of gameplay and replayability

i think ALL OF US as gamers would benefit from a coherent achievement system as it would mean every game offered a higher level of replayability over these current 'throw away' titles like avatar

discuss
and no gamerscore bashing - that was not the original point of my thread
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom