Why shouldn't Nintendo add achievements?

Nanashrew said:

It speaks volumes that channels like Achievement Hunter hasn't posted anything on how to get achievements for a game in years and transitioned to variety stuff and let's plays.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

There are still many successful channels that make guides on how to earn achievements and trophies, such as PowerPyx and PS4Trophies.

I think a reason they made the change to more generic content could be to have more control over their content. With achievement channels, your success largely fluctuates depending on which games are releasing, what achievements they have, if people actually need videos about them, and so on. Most of the games that bring in the big views are coming in at the end of each year. If it's just general gaming content, you can freely release content all year round .

Shadio said:

I think an achievement system could be beneficial for Nintendo. It offers a passive boost to player engagement and brand loyalty.

I had friends who were reluctant to switch over to PS4 because they didn't want to lose their achievement progress. And Microsoft seemed to be aware of the draw they had, offering an exclusive achievement to everybody who preordered the Xbox One and using it as a key selling point.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Yes because Nintendo really needs help boosting brand loyalty.

Yes. The fact that 11% of all Spider-Man players went out of their way to get the platinum trophy shows that even among people who aren't hardcore, there's at least an awareness and desire to earn them if the opportunity presents itself.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

It's 11%. And there's nothing stopping any dev from placating that 11% by adding achievements into their games.

I think they just don't know how to name such system.

Nintendo Powers (Super, Ultra and Hyper)?

Chindogg said:

Yes because Nintendo really needs help boosting brand loyalty.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Who said they *needed* the help? A boost is a boost.

Chindogg said:

It's 11%. And there's nothing stopping any dev from placating that 11% by adding achievements into their games.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

11% of millions of gamers of all ages and playstyles. I think it's a fairly significant amount to have completed this arbitrary checklist for no other reason than to have a trophy saying they did it.

But even if all of that 11% would've been happy to do that whether or not there was a system wide achievement system (which I don't think they would be), what is the problem with Nintendo providing the framework for developers to do that more easily?

KtSlime said:

And gaming did perfectly fine for decades without them. Also, Nintendo games still sell really well without them, so I suppose they aren't that important.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

They also sold well without online play in games that absolutely should have had online play. That is a bad argument.

It is a standard feature on two of the three console manufacturers. It hurts no one. It doesn't take immense resources. You can ignore them.

It's a fun feature for a lot of people. No one is saying "fuck Nintendo" here. I'm a huge Nintendo fan. But it should have a version of system-wide achievements.

Nintendo's games already have achievements and grinds for unlocks with almost no value. Only difference is that it's not visible to other people on a system level.

Those thinking Nintendo shouldn't include such a system wide level will make excuses for anything Nintendo isn't up to par with.

Shadio said:

There are still many successful channels that make guides on how to earn achievements and trophies, such as PowerPyx and PS4Trophies.

I think a reason they made the change to more generic content could be to have more control over their content. With achievement channels, your success largely fluctuates depending on which games are releasing, what achievements they have, if people actually need videos about them, and so on. Most of the games that bring in the big views are coming in at the end of each year. If it's just general gaming content, you can freely release content all year round .

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Oh definitely, but having that variety to bring in income during down periods doesn't mean they had to stop, but they seemingly have.

domthybomb said:

Nintendo's games already have achievements and grinds for unlocks with almost no value. Only difference is that it's not visible to other people on a system level.

Those thinking Nintendo shouldn't include such a system wide level will make excuses for anything Nintendo isn't up to par with.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

It's so strange, especially knowing that Nintendo would likely put their own spin on it. Tying it to My Nintendo? System-wide stamps to use in some sort of social setting? Etc.

Typhon said:

State your case. Aside from "it doesn't benefit me" why shouldn't Nintendo add a feature that's widely considered the standard?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Cause its makes em "lazy".
They have said it, they want to make games that people keep playing cause the game is engrossing enough, not to complete a glorified check list

werezompire said:

Studies in extrinsic & intrinsic motivation tend to find that adding extrinsic motivation often results in intrinsic motivation decreasing. In this case, this means that the mere act of adding a trophy/achievement system could actually decrease the amount of fun that many people get out of a game as intrinsic motivation (the game is fun, I want to see what I can do, etc.) decreases in favor of a desire to fill out a list of requirements to get an external reward.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Yeah? Your own game lacked achievements on Steam at launch, so I immediately shit-canned the idea of playing it.

I'm honestly not much of a trophy whore, but I'll be honest. I've not bought crash on switch because I want to get it on PS4 for the cheevos

I don't think that there's a particularly strong case for them not adding achievements. That being said, my selfish ass doesn't want them because I don't find them particularly fun or fulfilling anymore.

ContraWars said:

Yeah? Your own game lacked achievements on Steam at launch, so I immediately shit-canned the idea of playing it.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

You realize you only proved his point, right?

ContraWars said:

Yeah? Your own game lacked achievements on Steam at launch, so I immediately shit-canned the idea of playing it.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

This is part of the reason why I dislike Achievements/trophies.

I would rather less devices help spreading toxic mentalities like this.

I'm not being toxic. I'm saying I backlogged the game because it didn't have achievements as expected. An expectation set by the idea of it already having trophies on console.

It removed motivation for putting the time into it, as achievements tend to be goals to go after later in a game, which adds replay value.

ContraWars said:

I'm not being toxic. I'm saying I backlogged the game because it didn't have achievements as expected. An expectation set by the idea of it already having trophies on console.

It removed motivation for putting the time into it, as achievements tend to be goals to go after later in a game, which adds replay value.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

That was still a really rude way of saying that, directly to one of the devs even

People don't want anyone to find out they don't actually play most of the shit they buy and talk about tbh

Because I dont like them but I'm a completionist. I find games are more fun when I'm not worried about missing something the entire time.

Because they don't want to. The end.

Personally I don't care about achievements. And like some have said, it's better to implement in game achievements thsr reward you in game for doing specific challenges.

This will always be my favorite post on the subject:

Keldroc said:

As any Nintendo fan will tell you, Nintendo absolutely doesn't need trophies/achievements and are doing great without them. Until Nintendo does implement a trophy/achievement system, at which time they will become the most important and engaging element of a game system but only when done as perfectly as Nintendo does it. We have always been at war with Eastasia.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Grigorig said:

This will always be my favorite post on the subject:

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

As a Nintendo fan and multi-console owner, I stopped caring about achievements and trophies in the PS3 era. Not even stamps on the Wii U did it for me. Though at least with stamps, it was an intrinsic part of the game as another collectible but worked outside of the game via Miiverse.

KtSlime said:

1) It takes resources to make such a system, those resources could be used for making something more interesting/useful.

2) It effects game design decisions, and mostly offer nothing of interest because it exists to check boxes on a features list, which in turn leads to 'rewarding' players for doing what is already expected of them.

3) Developers are already free to implement their own rewards system. Games that use reward messages can easily be adapted to send the message to an in game message window rather than sending that message the OS. The 'hard' work of rewards/achievements is in the game itself, not the message.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

werezompire said:

Studies in extrinsic & intrinsic motivation tend to find that adding extrinsic motivation often results in intrinsic motivation decreasing. In this case, this means that the mere act of adding a trophy/achievement system could actually decrease the amount of fun that many people get out of a game as intrinsic motivation (the game is fun, I want to see what I can do, etc.) decreases in favor of a desire to fill out a list of requirements to get an external reward.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Nod, but unfortunately these will be ignored by a lot of people

This is coming from someone who reallllly doesn't know the inner workings of such things, but it seems pretty minimal to implement such a system. Not like they would have to come up with achievements per game, PS4 and XB1 already have them. I know it would take some system resources away to keep track of but surely its less than what recording a video has to do already right?

Personally I don't care about achievements , I like them early on in the 360 days just cause it was new but after a while I didn't care. (Call of Duty 2 on Veteran was a bitchhh)

Nintendo are reeducating some gamers that games should be fun not work, it's not that they can't do it, it is they won't, I applaud their efforts ;)

From a business point of view this strategy has worked

Somehow "I don't like them" is an invalid response for some, while "cause I like them" is valid. It's ridiculous. It requires time and effort to implement and adds a layer to your profile and the OS while not necessarily adding anything of value for a majority of users. "But options!" Sure. But that can be applied to literally any feature somebody wants. It's not a strong argument unless you actually back it up with data that goes well beyond your own anecdote of not wanting a game with no trophies.

Games are selling well on the Switch without them. I have an incredibly hard time believing that sales would go up a significant amount by spending resources on them. Seriously, this question needs to be flipped and trophy lovers need to explain what benefit they'd get from adding them other than a checked box on a feature list. Many of the arguments that were pushed last gen have been proven completely wrong. An extensive gamer score on a 360 did not keep most people in the Xbox ecosystem. Millions of people jumped to PS4 no issue.

ContraWars said:

Yeah? Your own game lacked achievements on Steam at launch, so I immediately shit-canned the idea of playing it.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Not only is this an extremely rude and tactless response, but also a ridiculous one that only proves him right.

I'm a trophy completionist myself, but I wouldn't reject a game I wanna play for lacking some periodic dings.

I guess the guys there at N don't want to give the resources t9 do it. I want them to figure out the online first though.

'Cause I think their install base doesn't care about them in general.

There is a really handsome Resetera user with a shiba inu for an avatar that doesn't like them, so I think that's pretty valid reasoning.

Dyle said:

It isn't a feature that is costing any sales

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

If I have to choose between buying the PS4 version of a game or the Switch version, I'll get the PS4 one because it has Trophies.
If Switch had achievements, I'd get THAT version because it has the added bonus of portability.

I'm sure I'm not the only one who thinks this way.

Shadio said:

Who said they *needed* the help? A boost is a boost.

11% of millions of gamers of all ages and playstyles. I think it's a fairly significant amount to have completed this arbitrary checklist for no other reason than to have a trophy saying they did it.

But even if all of that 11% would've been happy to do that whether or not there was a system wide achievement system (which I don't think they would be), what is the problem with Nintendo providing the framework for developers to do that more easily?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

The problem is they'd have to make a system that doesn't provide any real value when developers can make it for their own games as it is. Making a system-level achievement framework doesn't make it easier to make achievements, hell it actually makes it harder because there's yet another thing developers have to test to pass certification.

Because Achievements = Microsoft. Trophies = Sony.

So they are gonna add 'Stickers' instead. Or 'Stamps'.

KtSlime said:

1) It takes resources to make such a system, those resources could be used for making something more interesting/useful.

2) It effects game design decisions, and mostly offer nothing of interest because it exists to check boxes on a features list, which in turn leads to 'rewarding' players for doing what is already expected of them.

3) Developers are already free to implement their own rewards system. Games that use reward messages can easily be adapted to send the message to an in game message window rather than sending that message the OS. The 'hard' work of rewards/achievements is in the game itself, not the message.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

This. There's enough achievements in individual games already. Why get hooked more? Because Sony and MS are doing it? There are somethings that aren't necessary at all on Switch, and this is one of them.

Can't keep up Switch's ridiculous software sales if you're encouraging people to 100% all their games rather than move on to the next one

Musouka said:

I think they just don't know how to name such system.

Nintendo Powers (Super, Ultra and Hyper)?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

They call them Accomplishments in the 3DS StreetPass Mii Plaza

KtSlime said:

1) It takes resources to make such a system, those resources could be used for making something more interesting/useful.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

...what resources?

Especially considering many, many of these games already have achievements done and released on other systems.

KtSlime said:

2) It effects game design decisions, and mostly offer nothing of interest because it exists to check boxes on a features list, which in turn leads to 'rewarding' players for doing what is already expected of them.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

It does not need to. Most games can easily have achievements inserted into them, conceptually anyway. They are usually decided on after the fact as I understand it.

The second half of your point does exactly what OP asked not to do, which was point out that achievements are pointless and you don't care for them. Your bias against them is bleeding into them, and your point is not substantial at all.

KtSlime said:

3) Developers are already free to implement their own rewards system. Games that use reward messages can easily be adapted to send the message to an in game message window rather than sending that message the OS. The 'hard' work of rewards/achievements is in the game itself, not the message.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I actually love it when developers factor these systems into the game itself, because you always get that slim chance that they implement a Reward System in there too, and those almost always awesome, and give fun gameplay incentives to accomplish cool and unique objectives!

I will never be able to play Resident Evil: Revelations on anything other then the 3DS, and one of the reasons why is because of how fantastically they implemented their accomplishment system.

KtSlime said:

3) Developers are already free to implement their own rewards system. Games that use reward messages can easily be adapted to send the message to an in game message window rather than sending that message the OS. The 'hard' work of rewards/achievements is in the game itself, not the message.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

You...just said you didn't like resources being diverted for achievements, even though system level achievements are not resource intensive nor do they affect of game design. And then you go and say you think companies should go full on implementing achievements/rewards into the game? What?

Like that is the most irrational thing I've ever heard. "Games that use reward messages can easily be adapted to send the message to an in game message window rather than sending that message the OS." What? Why do you care if the game notified you via an in game message, or via the system? That is the weirdest hang up I've ever heard of. "The 'hard' work of rewards/achievements is in the game itself, not the message." What does this even mean? Why does it matter to you? What?

You don't want resources devoted to achievements, unless the notification is in game. Then they should go all out with them, and that would be a good use of their time. What on earth?

The only effect of having achievements only display in game is that no one else on your friends list can see them. Why is that important? What about those of us who like to display what we've done?

RestEerie said:

Because Achievements = Microsoft. Trophies = Sony.

So they are gonna add 'Stickers' instead. Or 'Stamps'.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Stars would be it i think,very nintendo-y :)
Anyway, the platform is all about making your own fun... i found actually fresh that it didn't have embedded that messaging system of achievements/whatever.
I don't need them, i find them toxic... people get glued on them instead of just letting the stress go away. Always be ranked/evaluated, it sucks... at least the base system does not force a mark on you. You finished the game but have a 15%... you suck, D minus (or whatever the usual system is)

Chindogg said:

It's 11%. And there's nothing stopping any dev from placating that 11% by adding achievements into their games.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

That 11% is those who actually platinumed the game. Many people like to get achievements but don't go for all of them.

Smash 4 list of challenges is what I call a good achievement system. Lots of effort in its presentation and design, cool rewards (like a real trophy, not a "bronze" generic one.

I don't really care if they should be posted online or not - I really have no interest in digital "bragging" (quotes cause that's not a bad thing per se).

But the problem is that if they make a system like this universal, very few developers would make an effort to produce something remotely similar.

MikeNeko said:

Stars would be it i think,very nintendo-y :)
Anyway, the platform is all about making your own fun... i found actually fresh that it didn't have embedded that messaging system of achievements/whatever.
I don't need them, i find them toxic... people get glued on them instead of just letting the stress go away. Always be ranked/evaluated, it sucks... at least the base system does not force a mark on you. You finished the game but have a 15%... you suck, D minus (or whatever the usual system is)

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

It would be coins and it would be Copper, Silver, Gold, Diamond.

It should be noted that Spider-Man is an outlier. It is very rarely ever that high.

werezompire said:

Studies in extrinsic & intrinsic motivation tend to find that adding extrinsic motivation often results in intrinsic motivation decreasing. In this case, this means that the mere act of adding a trophy/achievement system could actually decrease the amount of fun that many people get out of a game as intrinsic motivation (the game is fun, I want to see what I can do, etc.) decreases in favor of a desire to fill out a list of requirements to get an external reward.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Yep

You shouldn't encourage people to seek that kind of fulfillment from consuming other peoples' creative work. Achievements create an unhealthy relationship with the sense of accomplishment you get from succeeding at video games. I never understood why people needed a trophy to show how good they are at having fun.

They don't want to. But that's why I only play exclusives on Switch

AdolRed said:

You shouldn't encourage people to seek that kind of fulfillment from consuming other peoples' creative work. Achievements create an unhealthy relationship with the sense of accomplishment you get from succeeding at video games. I never understood why people needed a trophy to show how good they are at having fun.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Is this a serious post?

Zolbrod said:

If I have to choose between buying the PS4 version of a game or the Switch version, I'll get the PS4 one because it has Trophies.
If Switch had achievements, I'd get THAT version because it has the added bonus of portability.

I'm sure I'm not the only one who thinks this way.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I'm sure there are lots of people who think like you do. But is it a significant amount? That's what actually matters. Nobody has provided any reasons for trophies beyond anecdotes of them liking them. That's not remotely as strong an argument as people are making it out to be.

Nanashrew said:

It should be noted that Spider-Man is an outlier. It is very rarely ever that high.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I brought it up to show there's still a fairly large amount of people who care about trophy systems to some degree. It's a higher percentage than the average game because it's quite a short and easy platinum trophy, but the point was to show that there's still a good amount of people who will out of their way to earn these trophies.