/vr/ - Retro Games

>>3205610
>They make a achievements system
I never needed that.

>>3205610
Why not just make your own acheevs and write them down in the notes section in the manual?

Sounds like a shitty idea

>trying to have fun on /vr/
You fucking idiot, OP. What did you expect

Achievements in games are pointless.

>>3205610
Ideas like this are so tiring...

80% of my gaming is retro and emulated
i do have a registered retro achievement account
its kind of fun imo
you dont like the idea dont use the service
but dont cry about it

>>3205610
I just wish you could get them without having to log in. What happens when the site goes done? Oh guess no more achievements for you. :^)

>>3205753
down*

seems like an enjoyable way to play games and track your accomplishments vs. your friends, assuming they don't make it dumb. i probably wouldn't use it but w/e. neat though.

Doesn't work with hacks, so I didn't get to use it.

I always thought that the worst part about achievements was the little notification popping up while you play. I don't see what the problem is with this website though. Sure, it's pointless and this is probably the only time I'll ever visit it, but the idea of achievements aren't inherently bad, just because they're a trait of modern gaming. It's only bad when they're used to replace actual rewards in games (or you turn into that one guy that's obsessed with his "cheevos" and uses it to pick up women).

There have always pointless challenges for retro games anyways; speedrunning comes to mind.

imo the worst from of "acheivement" is those shitty grind like hell "clicker" games.. like seriously.. and then there are those fags that actually take it serious enough as too get clickbots involved and for what.. so you can get 999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999, damn cookies and get a 1% bonus and another baker?
fuck off an die


pardon my outburst

clicker games suck

>>3206440
>browser """gaming"""

>>3206424
I got an achievement in pacman on my phone and it blocked my view of the maze and I died :(

Achievements are crap but leaderboards are really cool

There was nothing to really achieve in most games except beating the game apart from maybe speedrunning or 1CCing it.

>>3205648
how are you friends meant to see that, i don't get how that would work if you wrote it down.

beating the game is the achievement.
git gud

>>3205610
>http://retroachievements.org
This is the saddest thing I've seen on /vr/

>>3205610
achievements
lol

They've been in the Xbox Arcade and PSN versions of the game forever.

>>3205610

I'll be the odd man out and say that I love it. My friends and I will use them for retro tournaments as a built-in point system, and some of the ones on RA have definitely made me try some things I might not have in older games.

This makes me feel so old and alien, I dont understand achievements at all

>>3205610
> people calling achievements modern gaming cancer
>not knowing that Activision Atari 2600 games had them

>>3205610

>>3207478

Not understanding achievements doesn't make you old and alien.

It makes you an idiot.

It's not hard to understand that humans like recognition for accomplishing things, and that this recognition often takes the form of some sort of badge, trophy, pin or certificate. Human's also like to collect things. Achievements combine both for no extra cost and without taking up physical space.

Not saying you have to like them, or even understand the passion that the hardcore achievement hunters have. But not understanding achievements at all? Come on now, son.

>>3207780

God damn that extra apostrophe. God damn it to hell.

>>3207478

>>3207785
while that's a nice bonus, i do it more for myself as a challenge. Same reason as i speedrun; my times are very average, but i don't do it for WRs... I just aim for sub [insert number here] and feel good when i get it.

>>3207780

my problem is when people only play for achievements or shit on a game because it doesn't have them

its like..and? who fucking gives a shit. No one cares about your epeen.

>>3205610
It's not as if it sounds like a bad idea, it just wouldn't really improve it significantly if at all.

>>3210057
I haven't heard this in a while. That kind of attitude was rampant a few years ago.

>>3207592
I think you have a point.

>>3210072
I remember seeing some screenshot of a guy who gave Dark Souls III a poor review for not having them, but that was definitely cherrypicked, I don't know how common the opinion is as a whole since I don't usually leave my retro cave.

>>3207780

I am the person you responded to

My problem is achievements is they create the sensation that everyone can achieve something in a videogame, but, only few people actually do, be it people who are great at multiplayer games and have a great win/loss ratio, or people who get very high scores, or speedrunners.

The average achievement is completely meaningless. It is like as vain and narcissistic as a selfie.

>>3210103

Some games hand out achievements like candy. Some have only one or two achievements, typically for exceptionally hard tasks. Most games have a mix of the two. RA has a wide range, with a fairly standard set of progress (beat stage 3, etc) achievements, no damage/death achievements, and completionist. Sometimes there are easter egg ones. Myself, I never knew you could kill NPCs in Final Fantasy Adventure until RA.

Notably, RA has a secondary point total, RetroPoints, that adjusts the worth of an achievement based on how rare it is amongst people who have an achievement in the game. So, exceptionally hard and time-consuming ones are worth more.

Personally, I like the progress achievements because it shows how far most people made it in a game.

>>3205753
This is what pisses me off, everything gets shut down eventually, and..

>But not in your life time bro xd

Shut the fuck up, yes, in your life time retard, just because something has success today it doesn't mean shit, Steam will probably not be around in 20 years, it will just be replaced by something else.

Remember when Xfire was a thing and the Steam meme still wasn't a thing? Well users just started to lose interest, it even had a game store, you could track hours (meh, but ok), and have screenshoots, videos, favourite servers, it was better than fucking steam because you were not tied to it, it would recognize retail games as well as games from Steam and other meme digital stores, a better platform overall, but it went to complete shit and finally shut down, all the content in my profile lost, and it will happen to the current platforms too, people get bored, they move to something else.

>>3210261

Fellow oldfag here.

Xfire was no where near as successful as Steam, anon. Valve is on track to have Steam running for the next two decades, guaranteed. With no sure sign of it getting as bad as Xfire.

Ubisoft has Uplay and it hasn't seen much success. EA has Origin and it has seen some success. Bethesda has plans to launch their own store client but we all know it'll just go the way of Uplay. Battle.net is successful as Blizzard is a confirmed juggernaut.

And yet, the only one of those that is remotely comparable to Steam is Battle.net. GoG, while great in its own right is nowhere near as successful. As of right now, its a safe bet that Steam will be fine twenty years from now.

>>3210270

What's so bad about it?

>>3205610
The only reason that I like achievements on steam is because you can see the percentage of people who've gotten them.

So, like if there is a game that has progress achievements, you can see which part people stop playing at.

I don't think that translates well to this situation since a small amount of people use it.

>>3210261
Steam is fucking terrible, but using the word meme like that is the worst thing a human being can do

>>3210270
So you hate DRM?

>>3210272
I think I read somewhere that valve had a plan for when/if steam shuts down. Like, you won't be able to re-download games from their servers, but you won't be locked out of them either. Or something.

>>3210276
Personal taste and not the guy you're replying to but I don't like paying retail costs for a digital license- especially one that can be taken away. On top of that it's additional DRM and has a number of bugs that get on my nerves. I'm not saying it has no good sides but it's massive success is worrying given how much power and monopoly it has for PC gaming, it allows them to push a lot of dodgy shit and go unchallenged. Paid mods was staunchly opposed but we all know it'll be back

>>3205610
I actively despise achievements and stay the hell away from them. This is more of an attempt to shit on old games than anything else.

>>3210302
Is your life so perfect that something as insignificant as achievements warrants your constant active resentment and hatred at all times because you have no other problems, or is your life so shitty that you have taken to actively hating everything you can no matter how insignificant because you cannot find joy anywhere else?

>>3210292
>but I don't like paying retail costs for a digital license
I hate that too. I don't like paying more than $10 for a digital game. But that's not steam's fault, it's the publisher. They keep it full priced to keep it even with the console prices.
Keep in mind that sales are very frequent, and old games tend to get a big price drop eventually.

>additional DRM
That's also an optional feature for the developers. Some games don't have it, like Bully.

>>3210324
>That's also an optional feature for the developers
Steam itself? Also
>it's massive success is worrying given how much power and monopoly it has for PC gaming
Even if a game or two on it are technically DRM free, the platform isn't, and people lap it up

>>3210324
What I meant was that the games themselves can't be played without running through Steam itself. Additional layers of DRM might be present on top of that but that's irrelevant to my point.

There's also no reason to pay the same price (even more given there's no competition) for a digital copy over a physical copy. No discs or cases have to be purchased or pressed/printed, no instruction manuals have to be written, nobody has to stock the item for you in a store, no goods have to be physically transported, etc. I never see games for sale above £40 in stores, but they're always £49.99 for digital, and on top that they can't be purchased used for a discount. Regardless of your ethics over pre-used games, there's just no positives and all negatives

>>3210349
aside from the points you mentioned, very limited resale abilities and you're completely at the mercy of the platform provider.

It's my personal opinion that digital copies should not be sold, but I know I'm a bit extreme in that regard.

>>3210272
Please, in 2007 Steam was barely a thing, yet everyone I know used Xfire to play mostly mutliplayer games but was common in general too.

I'm not saying it was as succesful as Steam today because the boom of the digital era kicked this decade, but it was the thing back in the day.

I call that Steam will be gone by 2030 or it will become a monthly paid service or some bullshit, then shut down not long after.

>>3210364
Digital is fine. More than fine, even. If it wasn't for digital, half this board would be dead. The digital versions of these old games keep them alive. But digital is in conflict with the concept of a "copy". There's just no such thing. If you got a piece of digital information, you got it twice, three times, any number of times. And so does everyone you're willing to pass the information to. With peer-to-peer internet and stuff like bittorrent we have the most reliable distributed backup of any digital information imaginable, /vr/ games are a prime example of that. I'm not even saying that to justify piracy, it's just the simple reality of digital data. DRM is an attempt to apply physical scarcity concepts, which just doesn't work.

>>3210418
>Xfire users: 25 mil
>Steam users: 125 mil
I'm not going to talk shit about Xfire as a service but unlike Steam there was nothing keeping users there. If people leave Steam they leave their library with them. I don't think this is a good thing by any means but it's obvious that Steam was going to have a longer running success, not to mention that it holds almost all of PC gaming in it's grip right now with no competitors in sight

>>3210423
You're absolutely right when it comes to piracy and truely pirates are the ones keeping the history of vidya accessible, but buying digital games released in the past decade through official channels almost always comes with DRM that links the game to your personal account. It's actually worse than official physical copies because at least you can share them with friends or sell them off second-hand to another buyer

Not the guy you're replying to by the way

>>3210430
that's the key. Steam traps people, and tightens its grip on them with every single sale. They're not being generous. They just prefer you don't do anything funny.

>>3210432
>but buying digital games released in the past decade through official channels almost always comes with DRM that links the game to your personal account
It's why I boycott it. It's a perversion of digital distribution. We're in total agreement

>>3205610
Back in my day, we used to call achievements getting the first place on a scoreboard.

Faggotry like "You ran the game!" that are in today's games needs to die.

>>3207780
no

an accomplishment is when you finish a stage and read:
>secrets found 4 of 4
>enemies killed 37 of 37
or even when you open your character statistics and see:
>[v] tittle "demon hunter" , killed 2204 of 2000 Balrons
>[_] tittle "lightbringer", killed 990 of 1000 Lich Lords

steam/newgrounds/et al "achievments" are just silly checklists of dozens of things per game, and no, i do not "get" that.

>>3206873
You can tell them face to face I R L. Or you can show them IRL if you need to brag about your video game edick size.

>>3210364
i feel you're mixing/confusing digital with "server dependant".

media has all but already died, sure you still shop bluray releases for xbox3 and ps4, but that hardly matters, many scheme requires the company's server communicating with your device.

digital media has all the pros and none of the cons, vr is a fine example of why, carts and ps1 discs occupying shelf space while rotting away, while a 3 terabyte usb hdd is in your drawer... how sad, that is, if cd burning, sd-mods and emulation didnt exist.

>>3210552
>digital media has all the pros and none of the cons
I probably sound nostalgic, but there's a certain "focus" to having a physical object with exactly one game. Nowadays we tend to have an abundance of choice, libraries, multitasking, with the emulator windowed and 4chan and spotify in the background. It kind of diminishes the value of each of them. With a physical game though, the moment you plug it in you commit to doing that and only that. There's no second option on that cart, no library, no distraction. And you take the time, you give the game the chance to unfold itself, instead of just fiddling with it for 5 minutes, then moving on to something else.
I don't necessarily want that all the time, but I welcome it every now and then.

>>3210529

Sure, "Killed 1000 enemies" is a poor achievement, although I can see those being interesting in musou games. But there's no difference between a level complete screen saying "4 out of 4" secrets, and an achievement that says "Found all secrets in level 3."

Achievements aren't the problem. Bad achievements are.

>>3210430
How is this contradicting what I said? Steam has 125mil today, in the era of digital games even in fucking consoles, not in 2007 when Xfire was more popular and Xbox Live barely a thing.

Yes Steam sucks because when it goes down you'll fucking lose money (they say you will be able to get the games, wow, thanks for letting me know I'll need to buy 97TB of HDDs to download everything I ever bought, and god forgive if any of them breaks down unless I get twice the space for a backup), but when Xfire went to shit you lost all your generated content, I think that's worse in a way, but you didn't lose games, you have Raptr today but its obviously not as succesful (even if in many ways better).

At least on GoG you can make a backup of your games as you buy them (the backups you do with Steam now would not work, because those have DRM).

Digital media was a mistake

>>3207780
Are you saying you should feel proud for repeating the same action a thousand times? Some games have achievements like 'walked X miles in-game!" or "shot Y bullets!". These are not 'achievements', they are either chores (if you need to run in a circle for an hour to get the required amount of miles) or things you accomplish by playing the game normally.

>>3211037

Again, achievements aren't the problem. Bad achievements are.

Games like Dustforce and The Witness have very singular achievements, usually one or two: beat the game, and do the hardest thing in the game.

Some games have achievements that encourage the player to try different playstyles. Mark of the Ninja and pacifist/killer runs, Civ V and the various win conditions and civilizations, etc.

Some games have funny achievements, like The Stanley Parable, that guide you toward easter eggs, or are easter eggs themselves.

Some games have speedrunning and no death/damage achievements. Nothing wrong with formally acknowledging that sort of thing, especially since, as adults, we're more likely to have other games we can play (instead of just mastering the most recent birthday gift while we wait for Christmas.)

Some games use achievements like candy, or just lazy achievements. And some games, yeah, they have terrible achievements that are timesinks or chores. Nobody is defending those, although there are absolutely people who love that sort of thing. Think, for example, of all the people who would grind their characters to max in jRPGs.

As long as you're not the sort of (actual) autist who has to 100% everything, this isn't a problem. Ignore bad achievements, pursue the ones that interest you.

>>3210734
>Bad achievements are
First, they're all bad.
Second, assuming you are talking about that status screen as an achievement abomination, which of the two is supposedly the bad one?

>>3211234
>Nothing wrong with formally acknowledging that sort of thing
everything's wrong with it

>>3211282
>>3211284

You guys feel like qualifying this opinion or can we just ignore this as shitposting?

>>3211323
considering you've made up your mind, why should I bother?

>>3205784
It works with some hacks now. Very specific, pre-approved ones, like Sonic Megamix.

>>3206870
Certain games actually have speedrun timers added into them, complete with leaderboards and the like.

There's also quite a few "gimmicky" achievements. I recall one for SMB1 where you had to beat World 1 without a single coin, or beat the first stage of Sonic 2 without pressing Left.

>>3210482
I actually like collecting achievements (often after I finish the core game as an incentive to stick around) but I will cave and admit that those achievements are stupid as hell.

>>3205610
The problem with cheevos is that all they do is reward you for playing the game, out doing menial tasks like jump 100 times. Rarely do they make you play differently or challenge you in a way the game doesn't itself

>>3211383
>or beat the first stage of Sonic 2 without pressing Left.
Achievement unlocked by: Everyone on the planet.

>>3205648
Do you even have the manual? You might have bought it used, or lost the manual yourself if you bought it new.

>>3211519
>Achievement unlocked: diss Sonic
>Achievement level: too easy
>Memelord points: 1
>(Converts to 1000000 faggot points)
>9999999 other 9gagers have unlocked this achievement

What shitty emulators you patched for this

>>3211512
>Rarely do they make you play differently or challenge you in a way the game doesn't itself

/vr/ shows its utter lack of knowledge about modern gaming again.

>>3212415

It's mostly just a few shitposters, and occasionally someone who really is just firmly mired in the past. Most of us enjoy games from all eras.

The irony is, places like RA help breathe a bit of new life into old games. Go look at their front page: it's an endlessly scrolling feed of people playing old games, and what they're doing in them. That's awesome. Every time /vr/ actually tries to play games together, the threads fall apart after a few tries.

It's this social "everyone can see your progress" cancer that is part of what's wrong wrong with videogames and wider society today. People are always being pushed to do things to hold it up. Forget about other people, once you have other people in the picture you start to do things differently. You're biased in how you're going to go forward, it's no longer just based on yourself.

>>3207780
>recognition for accomplishing things,

For accomplishing what? Videogames are virtual accomplishments, they don't make progress in real life. Did you help produce food? Did you help protect the environment? Did you help in the fight against cancer? If not you didn't do shit except for yourself.

I also think the same about "accomplishments" such as climbing mountains, winning sports games, winning a painting competition. Such things are fine to do by yourself, but they're not really helping the world.

>>3213667

>Forget about other people

Maybe you're just antisocial, anon.

>>3213676
why are you playing games?

>>3213667
>they don't make progress in real life.
No shit sherlock. Good job at missing his point.

He means you can make up your own challenges for any game you want, but when you do it nothing happens.
But when there's an achievement for completing a level with the weakest weapon and you get a message saying you did it, it just feels nice.
That's just a form of game design, like getting a fanfare after finishing a battle in an RPG.

>>3213676
Antisocial means actively against other people which I certainly am not. Antisocial behaviour means negatively interacting with people. The term is a misnomer really but that's what it means.

I'm tired of the stigmas and suggestions made against people who want to be alone for some of the time, and the false idea that they would be happier with others.

>>3213689
>you get a message saying you did it, it just feels nice
No, it doesn't. It feels insulting, like the devs giving you the finger and saying "told ya we would make you do that, lab rat"

>That's just a form of game design
addiction design, maybe. For a game it's terrible

>>3213689
>when you do it nothing happens
why do you need validation from the game? Are you dishonest with yourself, and need another party to confirm you didn't cheat yourself? Are you doing it for the game? Are you that dependent on outside validation, that you can not do something because you want to do it?
Achievements completely destroy personal interest, sense of wonder and involvement. They turn a personal approach to a game into a mass manufactured chore

>>3213693
He was responding to me, don't barge in please.

I think the 100% or whatever should come from the game itself. Entering third parties is throwing a spanner into it imo.

>>3213715
>the 100% or whatever should come from the game itself
percentage counters in games are an excellent way for me to trash a game instantly. Fucking collectathons

>>3213715
I did not barge in, in so far as I was exclusively responding to the quoted statements, which do not rely on the context of the exchange. What you discuss with others is your business, but these particular comments I felt were relevant to base my comments in the thread on.

>>3213693
>>3213698
>It doesn't feel nice
When you do something good, do you like when someone says "thank you"? Like that other guy was saying, it's human nature to like getting recognition for doing something.

>the devs giving you the finger and saying "told ya we would make you do that, lab rat"
Then don't do it? There's never a point where you cannot progress without earning an achievement. They're optional goals for people who can't get enough of a game.

>>3213715
>I think the 100% or whatever should come from the game itself.
That's a good point, I'd prefer that. But I don't think it hurts the game in any way to have achievements. It would be pretty hard to design a lot of in-game rewards for a lot of small optional tasks.

>>3213750
>When you do something good, do you like when someone says "thank you"?
is it an automatic response? Then no, I hate it. Is it an uninvolved third party? Then it bothers me. Is it saying thanks for something that didn't help them or improve things for them? Then I consider it dishonest rudeness.

>it's human nature to like getting recognition for doing something
Do you do it for the recognition? Then you're a sorry ass. Do you fall for automatic and generic recognition? Then you're shallow as fuck.

>Then don't do it?
Inevitable with bullshit achievements. Also, if for some reason I do come up with my own idea to do something, and the game preempts it with an achievement, the game robbed me of some fun, denying me these personal goals.

>I don't think it hurts the game in any way to have achievements
Strong disagreement, but you gathered as much already, I suppose.

>in-game rewards
Just how reward driven are you fucks? Can't you play a game for the sake of the game itself, and a personal sense of accomplishment? Do you really need the game to pre-chew everything for you? I feel so insulted when games tell me I'm too dumb to have fun on my own and must be strung along by "rewards" or else.

>>3213769
>Do you do it for the recognition?
>Do you fall for automatic and generic recognition?
>Just how reward driven are you fucks
No you idiot.
>They're optional goals for people who can't get enough of a game.
They're supposed to be fun. If they're not fun then don't do them. What's the problem.

>>3213769
>I feel so insulted when games tell me I'm too dumb to have fun on my own and must be strung along by "rewards" or else.

Not sure what's up your ass but there's nothing "dumb" or objectively wrong with what he's saying. Your idea of "personal goals" is no better.

Guess where you come up with all the ideas yourself? No game, real life. There are no objectives, and no rewards, all your "ideas" yourself, nothing to feel "so insulted" about.

>>3213798
>If they're not fun then don't do them. What's the problem
if for some reason I do come up with my own idea to do something, and the game preempts it with an achievement, the game robbed me of some fun, denying me these personal goals

>>3211234
This man knows the truth :D

Achievements are only good if they unlock stuff.

>>3213816
>if for some reason I do come up with my own idea to do something, and the game preempts it with an achievement, the game robbed me of some fun, denying me these personal goals

That is in no way true. You're applying your own misguided sense of rebellion to it - if you're trying to beat a game without dying for personal fun, it remains as fun as it supposed to whether or not there's an achievement (which are in and of themselves meaningless).

When you were growing up, did someone asking you to do something make you less likely to do it as opposed to you doing it of your own volition? I assume this must be the case for you to apply such a nonsense argument to the notion of optional gameplay styles.

>>3215198
>sense of rebellion
more like desire of exploration, discovery and personaly creativity

>it remains as fun as it supposed to whether or not there's an achievement
For you, maybe. For me that achievement is a big "fuck you" because the developer pre-empted my personal exploration.

>When you were growing up, did someone asking you to do something make you less likely to do it as opposed to you doing it of your own volition?
I came up with my own hobbies, and not because people told me "your hobby must be X". It's the difference between "go have fun playing in the sandbox" and "go build 3 sandcastles to these specs in the sandbox and I'll give you ice cream". It's turning fun into a chore. It's turning creative actions, even if every player may have that same "idea", into tasks. Your phrasing is equating the things you do in games with chores and tasks, and that's as far away from gaming as it can get. Or should be, anyway.

>I assume
Indeed you do. So much easier to just call my opinion nonsense and setting up mindless straw men to justify it to yourself, than spend a thought actually trying to put yourself in someone else's position

>optional gameplay styles
Willful ignorance is not helpful.

personally, achievements are just bonuses to add on to game experiences that you can show your friends and they can be like "Whoah, how did you do that?" or "You spent all this time doing that? That's crazy!", but that's if we're referring to modern vidya, in which I feel developers really don't give a fuck on what sort of achievements to make, so they do stupid stuff like "You beat the first level!"
Back then, people made their own goals when they were done playing a game or had been playing it for so long and want to try something new. Achievements for retro vidya isn't necessary, but I feel YouTube videos of glitches, speed runs, high scores, etc. and even back then with magazine articles, rumors, and other junk that encouraged people to spend hours upon hours doing things that aren't always important to completing a game, like finding Easter eggs, other secrets/Mysteries, getting the highest score possibke beating the gane super fast, and glitches to cheat or just have fun with a game.
Achievements in games now are nothing more than e-peen comparisons, it's pointless, but there was possibilities of it being a good way to give players more reason to continue playing even when the main game was done and over with, which explains why developers add so much collectables to give players something to do, even when they're not really doing anything important.
sorry for the long post, probably didn't even make a point, but felt like sharing my opinion.

>>3205610
Looked promising but it seems like you have to be online in order to get an achievement as well as use specially designed emulators in order to get them at all. Too bad for me that this is only for Windows only since I dedicated my Shield TV to emulation.

>>3215262
sorta
they're not a common thing and they don't come in as much bulk as back in the day.
half the time they're just regular upgrades in game or just dlc.
I think DLC killed the idea of cheats, as well as the internet.
cheat books are nonexistent, game magazines are dying, people just Google everything, and making goofy cheats probably adds more work that most developers are willing to put in.
granted I'm just talking outnof my ass, but this is what I assume.
game design and development has changed so much over the years, so the idea of cheats is more of a relic if anything.
I mean for fuck sake there's that stupid video of that guy from Mass Effect 3 saying "oh end bosses are so video gamey".
the last thing related to Video game cheats I can remember in modern gaming is big head mode in Batman: Arkham City, there was some talk about it and it was just one cheat.
I also fucking hate the popularization and spread of the Konami code. I mean it was never an obscure thing, included in many Konami classics, and very catchy to memorize, but I hate when other games/media make reference to it, it's like
>muh first video game reference

>>3213816
Anon, I hate achievements too but you're going a bit extreme with this. You know that, at least on Steam, you can turn achievements off, right?

>>3205610
N E W A G E K I D S

K N O W I N G

S H I T

A B O U T

P L A Y I N G

G A M E S

>>3216024
I don't use Steam, and they're still in the game, the development process, the concept, are they not? You're suggesting what amounts to make-up

>>3211331
Yes

>>3211331
You're the one who's defining achievements as being bad without actually bothering to put forth any form of argument. I'd be interested in hearing something actually /vr/-worthy instead of the /v/-tier shitflinging that's been going around.

Then again, perhaps /vr/'s reputation of knowing absolutely fucking nothing about modern gaming has preceded itself again.

>>3205610
Carefully designed token reward systems engineered to maintain my interest in a game though periodic reminders of numeric accomplishment that distract me from underlying bad buggy flawed gameplay and half-assed level design so I can brag to my virtual friends on Playbox Live who I've never met and who may or may not be bots designed by Bill Gates?

Boy oh boy, sign me up!

>>3216858
So close to making an actual point and then you pissed it away by equating flawed gameplay and bad level design as being part and parcel of achievements. That wasn't even the subject at hand since the gameplay in OPs question was distinctly /vr/ games.

You guys do know that achievements are in games to allow the devs to track how much of the content the average player clears and what parts of the game people care about, right?

R-right?

>>3216882
Yep and it turns out the majority of people don't get past the tutorial levels.

>>3216882
While I do know that, the site in the OP also keeps track of leaderboards for arcade style games which is really great in making an old game feel fresh again.

>>3207592
This. Idk why /vr/ is so pissed about this

>>3216902

>look up steam achievements for a game you love
>1% of players have completed it
>15% have finished the first chapter

>>3216871
Valid point, and I hesitated to write it because /vr/ games weren't designed with accomplishment systems like modern games, and thus couldn't rely on them as a band-aid for bad gameplay.

But I left it in because engaging games are rewarding in their own right and need no accomplishment system. Clearly I am an idealist. Then again I grew up where "accomplishments" were shared with friends directly because no cell/internet, but that's impossible now. I dunno. I fail to see the point of a checklist of things to do that comes with a game. Most people play the checklist and then out down a game never to return. Not that the game was fun, but because there was a list of things to do. "Perfect Runners" on JRPGs with 99's of everything in everything are similar. You play a game for 1000hrs to do that, but at the end of the day you are just very obtusely setting bits in a game's SRAM; did you actually enjoy the process? I maintain that accomplishment systems serve more to foster artificial interest in a game than to enhance gameplay. Furthermore, they are a meaningless checklist of sights to see before you are "done" with a game so you can feel accomplished in some capacity, and encourage not looking closely at what makes a game particularly good; fun mechanics, and/or good level design. No thank you.

Kinda rambling, but that should be a better argument for ya.

>>3216918
Chievos can be a great crutch for a beginner.
Getting an achivement for beating an individual level on one life/credit feels like a more natural way to learn the game than look at the entire 1cc/no miss run and trying to do it all in one sitting. Once I discovered the joy of doing individual levels I never bothered with full runs anymore.

>>3216918
Don't forget that at the end of the day either way it's an arbitrary artificial goal you've completed by beating the game. Just do whatever you want, there are literally no rules. All categories are arbitrary.

>>3216939
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHA1qxsLH-0

>>3216918
It was, thanks.

You've got a myopic vision of what achievements are, though, in that you've pigeonholed them into a series of checklists, which, yes, some do, but not all. Some people like checklist achievements, which is why we have them, and then you have achievements that actually are for people who play the game in different ways as they should be.

A non-/vr/ example (for obvious reasons) but: Anyone who sets themselves up for a Plasma Cutter Only run of Dead Space gets an achievement - they played it in a specific style that altered the gameplay in a fundamental way. It wasn't "Kill 100 Necromorphs with the Plasma Cutter", it was "Play through the whole damn game without switching your weapon from Plasma Cutter," and as an achievement it's really fucking easy to blow it and very difficult to pull off. Doing it is something a dedicated player would actually be proud of.

Something /v/ has been doing lately is calling people who criticize games for being too easy out by asking to see their "Beat *GAME* on Hardest Difficulty" achievements - in this case an achievement is also a definitive proof that someone has managed a difficult task.

The only thing people have been cautioning is that you can't judge all achievements by the worst examples. The fact that they can (and are) completely ignored by some players without affecting their gameplay renders the basis that all achievements somehow fundamentally alter the games moot as well.

>>3216935
A well designed game uses good level design to demonstrate the mechanics without even a word. Take Super Metroid for example, a shining example of this philosophy. Every time you get a power up, the game immediately challenges you to use the power up or shows you a trick that can be done with the power up, sometimes in such a subtle way that you didn't even realize you just learned something. For instance, if you get the grapple as a beginner, you are challenged with a multi room obstacle course that gentle lets you get used to the new equipment. More subtlety, when you pick up a missile pack to the left of the first shaft in Crateria, on the return you have to bomb your way out, but instead of coming back the way you came, if you hold right like 90% of players do here, you instead discover the concept of hidden morph ball passages, which clues you in to look out for them. All of this done wordlessly.

I think accomplishments serve to break up the flow of a video game more than not (same with cut scenes). This video is a parody, of course, but illustrates what I mean:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BT40EQHYbJ8

>>3216979
>Take Super Metroid for example
eh I'm speaking of actual challenges. That whole game is a walk in the park.

Pic related had an interesting feature called Subject mode that managed to work the achievements INTO the scoring system.

>>3205610
fucking moronic

>>3205753
It's for data tracking, these sites are scams so they can get your browsing data and then sell it off to various companies. With major companies like youtube or facebook your info are at least only being sold to legit data mining companies, but with sites like this, who knows. No one ever stops to think the real purpose of these shady sites owned by companies unknown that force you to sign into use them.

>>3216935
>Getting an achivement for beating an individual level on one life/credit feels like a more natural way to learn the game
wtf, why can't you just fucking learn the game by playing it, you dumb kids need to fuck off

>>3217021
achievments are usually won by doing mundane things you would do in the game anyhow, also you used learning how to play the game as an example as to why achievements are a good idea. Stop trying to back track.

>>3217079
I have nothing against achievements if they are used correctly, but ever since steam became ultra popular now people feel like putting in achievements just to have them and give them out for just doing things that would happen in the game anyhow. I remember some games that had early achievement systems and they would be for things that were actually hard to do, and you would get some sort of in game reward, now they are just there.

>>3205610

That website's pretty cool. I made a few achievement sets for some games I liked because it's pretty simple to do that aren't terribly well known in the vague hope that it would cause some people to play them.

From the looks of things, it worked. So I'm glad I was able to share things with a few people.

>>3217107
wow, that's some obvious shilling there, you post read like those fake reviews you see on some websites. I wonder how much you guys are getting paid to do this.

>>3217145
oh, and yes I notice that I made a couple of typos, before you use that as an excuse to pull attention away from what I said about your own post.

>>3217145
>>3217152
>different opinion = shill

Fuck off /pol/.

>>3217260
It isn't that he had a difference in opinion, it's that his comment read like a fake review trying to sell the site, not a genuine post.

>>3217269
DAMN~*~@ WOULD U TAKE A L@@K @ THIS SITE W O W

>>3210312

I love Dr. Katz.

>>3217523
May 15, 2014- anonymous poster on Internet admits to liking a popular TV show
Any other fascinating opinions you'd like to share for the record?

>>3217537
I am from the future?

>>3217073
Guess I chose my words wrong, I do play full game runs I just don't try beating games in 1cc settings anymore. More like I try to beat my personal bests on a level to level basis, makes a lot more sense to me, saves time from repeating the same easy initial stages over and over again. Achievements made me see that, and for that I am thankful :)

>>3205610
It's the same as speedruns, no miss challenges or playing in the highest difficulty settings. Just a means to give some more life span out of the same old game.

>>3216853
>You're the one who's defining achievements as being bad without actually bothering to put forth any form of argument
You're calling them good and made no effort either. Why pretend yours is the default position?

>I'd be interested in hearing something actually /vr/-worthy
They're in this thread

>instead of the /v/-tier shitflinging that's been going around.
Why am I not surprised?

>/vr/'s reputation of knowing absolutely fucking nothing about modern gaming
I do not understand modern game concepts, indeed. I find them insulting, aggressive, misleading, dishonest and player hostile. Achievements fit well in that mess though, I'll give you that

>>3218004
>You're calling them good and made no effort either.
I didn't say anything of the sort. I asked you to qualify your argument beyond "they're bad cuz they're bad."

>>3218028
that's why you went around asking people who liked achievements to qualify their position or consider them shitposting. No default position there, no, sir.

>>3217145

I wish I lived in your retarded universe where sincerely expressing like for something without a hint or irony or qualification means I'm a paid shill. What the fuck man.

do you really think the website can even afford to pay people to shill for it on 4chan of all places

>>3205610
Achievement systems were novel at first and then quickly evolved into cancer.

>>3205610
>They make a achievements system for retro consoles
No they don't. Your shillfu is not strong.

>>3218037
He explained his position. You two didn't.

I loathe achievements except the battle trophies in Star Ocean 3 on PS2.
In that game there was something like 430 of them with each boss typically have 5 or so trophies affiliated with it like "no damage taken" or "defeat quickly" and there were a bunch of other trophies like "deal 111 damage" that you'd get while playing. There were even trophies for defeating the final boss at level 1 or with the starting weapon. It was fun and done completely inside the game.
It unlocked alternate palettes for characters and higher difficulty settings.

In Star Ocean 4 the battle trophies became awful and emblematic of the achievement systems of today - it was tied to individual characters and some of them were pure grinding like "defeat 9999 enemies as ___".

>>3218348
Isn't 4chan one of the top 500 websites? Obviously a tiny site like this wouldn't pay to shill of course, but I'm bringing it up because people always act shocked at the idea that anyone, including a AAA publisher, would pay someone to shill for them "on 4chan of all places" when 4chan is actually pretty large.

>You got a secret bonus point!

>>3219808
You didn't really gain anything from finding them all, did you? I guess you got points for extra continues.

There is literally nothing wrong with achievements.

>>3205610
I think achievements in games are shit

Best example is WoW, as soon as Achievements hit live servers people stopped caring about stuff like 10man-naked-lowlvl-dungeon-runs or about other stuff they did themselves
It's like Achievements decreased the creativity of communities

>>3219385
>Isn't 4chan one of the top 500 websites?

No.

>>3219925
I just checked, and you're right, it's top 500 in the US but not worldwide. I must have looked at the wrong figure.

>>3213816
Then that idea wasn't very original and you don't deserve to have fun

>>3219937
moot once said that per capita it was most popular in Australia.

>>3220079
Oz neither accounts for most popular by total visits (America) or weighed per capita (Canada).

>>3219362
How is 'deal 111 damage' an accomplishment? That's even worse than 'kill 1000 of enemy X'.