5 réponses à ce sujet

[SeismicGravy]

If DA3 is to have a multiplayer mode, is it possible you could limit the amount of achievements for it?  It's so frustrating when you buy a game with 1000g, only to realise that 700g is dedicated to online gaming. 

Might be just me being petty, but I'm sure I'm not the only one that get's a little miffed by this.

[Fiddzz]

I'm having a hard time understanding the logic in the argument. Achievements are usually rewards for doing specific things related to the game in general, and THEN there are the "jump through 35 hoops in the chronological order of the developers kids ages" achievements.

As a completionist myself, I find those to be very annoying and "why do I have to do that to get the achievement" runs through my mind. But... that's the point, its an achievement, get 10 points for doing this random thing, I don't have to do it, some are fun some are not, but it's there if I want.

Grinding 1000 hours running zig zaggy to get that single player one isn't fun to me, but I do it.

So my question about the OP is this, most achievements are time sinks, how is playing a multi player match (I'M NOT CONFIRMING OR DENYING MP IS IN DA) for those 10 points, any different than running zig-zags for 30hrs? Is it because that is not fun for you? My follow up would then be, running the zig-zags for 30hrs isn't fun for someone else, but doing MP achievements would be.

When we make achievements we try to think of fun things (and some mean spirited ones too hehe ) that would appeal to all the different people that play our games, who enjoy many different things about our games.


----edit
To clarify, I agree with your example, a mainly single player game should have mainly SP achievements. Something like borderlands being 700/1000 MP specific achievements makes sense for them, but not for say, Far Cry 3.

Modifié par Blair Brown, 07 janvier 2013 - 06:15 .

[Fiddzz]

What i'm seeing is two parts to this, the "i'll never play multiplayer so they shouldn't have achievements for it" which I personally don't agree with ( that logic would then dictate the reverse argument ) Also that you could have them separate from SP achievements, (but then there would be 1300points, 1000 SP, and 300 MP, which would still leave a certain amount unfinished in some peoples eyes. If you had 1000/1000 single player achievements and then another 300 that were just there for MP... there would really be no drive for people to complete them, thus invalidating the point of having them, and were back to don't put them in which I don't agree with. (vicious cycle)

Second point is MP achievements having an available SP way to get them. Which is what ME3 had, and people seemed to have liked. Is that preferable? Or are there still people who don't want MP achievements at all? (once again I don't understand the logic)

My question now then is, what is the problem with having some achievements for MP only? Citing "I don't play MP so it's unfair" does not seem like a good enough answer to me. Would not MP players find it unfair that someone could get the same achievement as them without having to play MP?

Does it really take away from your gaming experience that you cannot get that last 50 points of achievements because they are for MP only?

This all goes back to my point that when we are making up achievements we try to hit something for everyone, as there are many people who play our games for different reasons.

Would console specific ones work better, ie. for xbox have MP specific achievements that don't effect the overall achievement "total" due to it being a pay to play service?

[Fiddzz]

Sanunes wrote...

Since we are talking achievements I would like to mention I really enjoy the odd-ball ones that Valve put into the episodes of Half-Life 2.  For I played episode one only using a single bullet and episode two carrying the garden gnome all the way to the rocket, for they challenged me to play differently then I normally would.

Those are the really fun ones to think up too

---------------

I would like to thank everyone for the input on this, and please keep it coming, from what I keep hearing, the ME3 way of blending them together seems to be the most acceptable way to make most people happy.

[Fiddzz]

OMTING52601 wrote...

Blair Brown wrote...

What i'm seeing is two parts to this, the "i'll never play multiplayer so they shouldn't have achievements for it" which I personally don't agree with ( that logic would then dictate the reverse argument )

That argument could work for a game that was a balanced MP/SP from the get go, but I kind of think arguing that "I'll never play SP so they're shouldn't be achievements for it" is out of place in a DA discussion, since DA is an SP game. Not saying your point isn't valid, just not in this case, IMO, FWIW (which is likely little, lol).

Second point is MP achievements having an available SP way to get them. Which is what ME3 had, and people seemed to have liked. Is that preferable? Or are there still people who don't want MP achievements at all? (once again I don't understand the logic)

Absolutely! Having equivalent achievements, similar to ME3, would be a good way to balance wants of both crowds. I played a single game of MP in ME3 - pre EC, so that should explain why - and nailed all the achievements save for the 'nightmare' ones, which I wasn't interested in to begin with.

To your second question, the only reason why I don't 'want' MP achievements is because I'm not interested in a DA MP in the first place. So having no achievements would indicate no MP and I'd be thrilled. If, however, MP is a given, then equivalent achievements is the way to go.

My question now then is, what is the problem with having some achievements for MP only? Citing "I don't play MP so it's unfair" does not seem like a good enough answer to me. Would not MP players find it unfair that someone could get the same achievement as them without having to play MP?

Does it really take away from your gaming experience that you cannot get that last 50 points of achievements because they are for MP only?

This all goes back to my point that when we are making up achievements we try to hit something for everyone, as there are many people who play our games for different reasons.

Would console specific ones work better, ie. for xbox have MP specific achievements that don't effect the overall achievement "total" due to it being a pay to play service?

The 'problem' as it were with MP, from my POV, is that DA isn't an MP game. I understand things change, ideas morph, projects evolve, but putting MP in DA doesn't strike me as an evolution, but frankly as a money grab - looking to micro-monetize something that doesn't need it. There are PLENTY of quasi-MMO's out there, RPG's with MP (Fable jumps straight to mind). I'm not interested in that type of game. And I'm not alone there, either.

In fact, the greater overarching issue seems to be the idea that all games need an MP element to be profitable, which is ludicrous. Certainly, games based on a MP idea (CoD, WoW, etc) are profitable, but they are built and designed to be multi-player. Look at the success of Skyrim. That game is wildly successful (actually the entire franchise is pretty dang successful) because it sticks to what it's good at: a massive, SP, open-world RPG.  Sure, there's Elder Scrolls: Online yet to be released, but this MMO isn't a Bethesda project. Why? Because Bethesda is sticking with what they know they do well and they're trying to make sure that the Elder Scrolls remains as popular with its customers as ever. 

As to fairness for MP players, I think the better question to ask isn't whether or not an MP player would think it 'unfair' that an SP player could get the 'same' achievements, but rather is there really a demographic large enough to project high enough profits from an MP only crowd for Dragon Age. In other words, is there really a large pool of potential consumers who would play an MP only Dragon Age game? If not, then likely the potential consumers would be coming for the SP and perhaps engaging in an MP to extend their enjoyment of the world/characters/story but not as their primary motivation for buying. And as such, I doubt there would be much, if any, complaints about any 'unfairness' in regard to MP/SP equivalent achievements.

Having MP only achievements CAN take away from my gaming experience, if I feel like it's being 'forced' on me. I'm not sure how to say that less confrontationally, as it were, but IMO if I'm picking up a game for its campaign/SP experience, and not for MP, then seeing MP only achievements w/o an equivalent of the same for SP only games, I tend to feel... slighted, I suppose is the proper word. Sometimes, it's all about perception, so if I come away from an SP game feeling lackluster about the experience, I'm more likely to be negatively affected if said game also has MP elements with rewards only for those who play it. I'll feel like my SP game was cheapened because someone thought microtransactions was a good idea. Of course, this is only my opinion and I'm not attempting to infer it's any one else's, nor that it is 'right', so to speak. Just trying to honestly answer your question.

As to console specific achievements, I think that's the road to folly. If you start actively separating your demographics with 'individualized' achievements, that can really feed into deeper divisions between each console as well as pc gamers. Better to stick to equivalent achievements - if you do this in MP -or- do this in SP then you get this - in order to ruffle as few feathers as possible. For what it's worth, of course.

Trying to stay away from the MP/SP as a feature debate and focus on just the achievements.  I'm really just trying to get an idea of what people like/don't like about how MP ones are obtained.  This has been a really informative discussion so far 

I want to understand peoples reasoning behind their opinions on a deeper level then, "i don't like it because i don't like it"  It helps us make better decisions.

Keep it up! 

This thread has also had me think to start up a general achivements thread when we get farther down the development line, not so much for a "what specific ones do you want" but, what TYPES do you like, what KINDS of achivements are fun/not fun. ..... already my brain is running a mile a minute. (another thread for another day)

[Fiddzz]

nightscrawl wrote...

Blair Brown wrote...

Does it really take away from your gaming experience that you cannot get that last 50 points of achievements because they are for MP only?

If people are really going to be that way about achievements and points then they need to just suck it up and play the MP. I say this as a person who has no interest in a DA MP, even if it is co-op or some other innocuous thing. Other people may have a grand time, it's just not for me.

I play World of Warcraft and enjoy collecting achievements in that game. There is one for doing the /love emote to various critters; I go out of my way to do things like that, or read a bunch of in-game books. There are also PvP achievements. I don't PvP in WoW and I've resigned myself that I will never fill out those points. PvP is there if I really want to do it some day.

Gazardiel wrote...

I come from pre-achievement gaming days, so they're new to me and less of a concern, but I agree with Fast Jimmy on desiring more achievements that require something more than "playing the game and getting through plot points".  Other people have mentioned party composition - I think that would be a fun one, and I'm plannning my "Charlie's Angels" all-female playthrough since I've done my "DudeBro" run already.  I'm okay with a few random achievements - when I played WoW, I was amused to get an achievement for something odd, like falling off an elevator - it gives players little surprises (not there aren't some already).     

As long as the inclusion of MP achievements doesn't fundamentally change how I enjoy my SP game, I'm okay with them.

Yep, I agree there. I would like there to be challenging achievements, similar to what WoW offers with their dungeon and raid achievements. Some are fun/silly, like every member of the raid having a dog pet out during this one fight, others are very challenging like avoiding specific damage attacks and generally doing things that make a fight harder, and still others are pretty simple like a speed kill.

I've always thought WoW has done an amazing job with their achievements.  The ideas, breadth, and implimentation is just spot on.