joe14636
xAluru wrote:joe14636 wrote:Micro$oft didn't do achievements first. Many games had arbitrary awards before the first Xbox even released.xAluru wrote:By the way, NO LINKS FOR YOU.If there's is one thing that Microsoft did first it's achievements, and they definitely excel in it.Explain how they "excel" in it, if you don't mind.
IMO there just better, you don't have to look at 4 different types of achievements like you do with trophies.
Fat_bot
I'm getting to an almost Pavlov's Dog response to the stupid things... even if my gamerscore doesn't necessarily illustrate it, lol.
nintendoes
joe14636 wrote:xAluru wrote:IMO there just better, you don't have to look at 4 different types of achievements like you do with trophies.joe14636 wrote:Micro$oft didn't do achievements first. Many games had arbitrary awards before the first Xbox even released.Explain how they "excel" in it, if you don't mind.xAluru wrote:By the way, NO LINKS FOR YOU.If there's is one thing that Microsoft did first it's achievements, and they definitely excel in it.
I like achievement points better than trophies but trophies are more explanatory. You can see exactly how they received what they have. Did they do a bunch of easy stuff (casual) or did they go for the real glory (hardcore)?
You've been owned by Nintendoes.
GasTankKiller
I love nerd cred but I don't go crazy over it.
Crunch40
Well, when I'm bored or when I see an opportunity for a trophy(no 360, srry) I usually go for it. In fact, the only game where I actually tried hard to get all the trophies(emphasis on tried) was inFAMOUS. Its not like there is a leprechaun in front of the TV with a pot of gold just waiting for me to get a headshock using precision while sliding on a wire(Ride the Lightning btw).
*insert drugged mushroom/mushroom high joke here*
Train_of_Thought
i only do it with the games i own (or rarely rent), i'm not like those people who go and play like, 50 games, but barely have shit for achievements/ trophies in each game, a.k.a. they put no work into them, just so they can boost their score up alittle.
i have 73% of my achievements out of 18 games played for 360, and 71% of trophies out of 8 games that have trophy support for PS3.
joe14636
nintendoes wrote:joe14636 wrote:I like achievement points better than trophies but trophies are more explanatory. You can see exactly how they received what they have. Did they do a bunch of easy stuff (casual) or did they go for the real glory (hardcore)?xAluru wrote:IMO there just better, you don't have to look at 4 different types of achievements like you do with trophies.joe14636 wrote:Micro$oft didn't do achievements first. Many games had arbitrary awards before the first Xbox even released.Explain how they "excel" in it, if you don't mind.xAluru wrote:By the way, NO LINKS FOR YOU.If there's is one thing that Microsoft did first it's achievements, and they definitely excel in it.
Achievements can be like that too, if you see an achievement worth a lot of points then you could tell it most likely was really hard to get, then again they achievements like beat the game on the hardest difficulty for 10pts, just to fuck with you.
nintendoes
I like trophies in that it tells how HARDCORE a gamer is. . . you can't tell by what games or console he/she has but this tells all. Achievements can be gotten just from getting a lot of games and fulfilling the easier tasks. . . trophies tells exactly what TYPES of tasks one accomplished.
I still think achievements are better for comparative purposes but trophies are best for the hardcore/casual argument.
You've been owned by Nintendoes.
joe14636 wrote:nintendoes wrote:
joe14636 wrote:I like achievement points better than trophies but trophies are more explanatory. You can see exactly how they received what they have. Did they do a bunch of easy stuff (casual) or did they go for the real glory (hardcore)?
xAluru wrote:IMO there just better, you don't have to look at 4 different types of achievements like you do with trophies.
joe14636 wrote:Micro$oft didn't do achievements first. Many games had arbitrary awards before the first Xbox even released.Explain how they "excel" in it, if you don't mind.
xAluru wrote:By the way, NO LINKS FOR YOU.If there's is one thing that Microsoft did first it's achievements, and they definitely excel in it.
Achievements can be like that too, if you see an achievement worth a lot of points then you could tell it most likely was really hard to get, then again they achievements like beat the game on the hardest difficulty for 10pts, just to fuck with you.
And 1000 for just turning on the game.
Train_of_Thought
nintendoes wrote:I like trophies in that it tells how HARDCORE a gamer is. . . you can't tell by what games or console he/she has but this tells all. Achievements can be gotten just from getting a lot of games and fulfilling the easier tasks. . . trophies tells exactly what TYPES of tasks one accomplished.I still think achievements are better for comparative purposes but trophies are best for the hardcore/casual argument.
sometimes the developers just half ass the reward system. i've encountered a few rewards where you're given too much points for an easy task, and too little points for a hard task, same goes with trophies. super stardust hd is an example, you get a Gold trophy just for having a partner nearby you for 3 minutes.... and yet you only get a silver for destroying 10 nukes in Endless mode - which takes longer than you'd expect.
