EEDAR: Are X360 Achievements too hard?

By Robert Purchese Published 15 March, 2010

Less than a third earn half the rewards.

New research has shown that nearly a quarter of Xbox 360 owners earn less than 10 per cent of a game's Achievements, and that only four per cent seek out every reward.

EEDAR's Jesse Divnich, speaking at GDC (reported by GamesIndustry.biz), said 27 per cent of people earn half of a game's Achievements, but less than 10 per cent of people attain 80 per cent of the Achievements or more.

"Does this mean Achievements are too hard?" pondered Divnich, who did see a correlation between higher-scoring games and Achievements earned.

EEDAR (Electronic Entertainment Design and Research) analysed 32 million data points provided by Microsoft. From that, 100 games were selected at random and conclusions made.

EEDAR also offered some other interesting statistics, such as that the RPG genre turned out the most new IP - 40 per cent, to be precise.

Among the publishers endeavouring to create new brands was EA, deemed to be the third-highest new IP producer on PS3 and 360.

And, despite the worldwide recession, the amount of new IP has risen from 16 per cent in 2006 to 22 per cent in 2009.

Picture of Robert.

About Robert Purchese

Bertie is Eurogamer's Senior Staff Writer. When he's not hunting down news stories he's often found playing with his kids or gabbling about fantasy games and strange online worlds.

Read more articles from Robert by visiting the Robert Purchese archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (136) Latest comment 2 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Drone #1 2 years ago

    88% of all statistics are made up on the spot

  • RedPanda #2 2 years ago

    Post deleted at 14:31:59 28-01-2012

  • sfp_noodle #3 2 years ago

    no, it doesnt mean achievements are too hard, it jus means tht people cnt be fucked to collect a thousand light seeds in prince of persia looking for an in game reward, only to realise tht all ur gna get is an achievement! tht took me 5 bloody hours ubisoft! 5 hours of pain and torture for nothing but a little bit of GS :(

  • anomagnus #4 2 years ago

    i'd say that most achievements are either obscure, pointless or require game breaking action to be of any interest to the majority of gamers. Do i really want to break my flow of a game just to stick a grenade in three different assholes and use a sniper rifle to detonate them?

    No, i do not.

  • lordofthedunce #5 2 years ago

    I think they're about right in most games.

  • sebsal #6 2 years ago

    I can finish a game and only have received 40% of achievements. I usually cant be bothered playing through again on Impossible difficulty or searching every corner of a map for hidden seagulls.

    So for me, it not worth the effort just for some points on a meaningless score

  • the_dudefather #7 2 years ago

    I managed to finish EDF without earning a single achievement :/

  • wizlon #8 2 years ago

    Most games are about right. With the exception of Multiplayer achievements which should burn in hell!!

  • Sir_TimAlot #9 2 years ago

    I FUCKING LOVE ACHIEVEMENTS!!!!!!!!! (and trophies) but thats just the way my brain is wired, totally get how most people don't care...

  • lennon #10 2 years ago

    Agreed on the multiplayer achievements. Get rid of them I say.

  • Eraser #11 2 years ago

    It's indeed not about difficulty, it's about the time needed to invest them.
    Most non-asian gamers aren't grinders, so when you have to make 100,000 kills in Gears of War 2, nobody is wanting to do that. It's all about not making achievements about doing repetitive things.

    I also hate it when there's an achievement for finishing a game at the highest difficulty when that difficulty is unlocked only after finishing the game on a lower difficulty first. I cannot be arsed to play an entire game twice just for the sake of an achievement.

    Multiplayer achievements are annoying as well.

  • RedPanda #12 2 years ago

    Post deleted at 14:31:59 28-01-2012

  • danmachine #13 2 years ago

    i think the issue is that there isnt that many games that are worth the effort to get these acheivements so people dont bother playing to get the extra acheivements that require alot of time but there not really too hard i would actually argue that there too easy
    Edited by 1 at 15/03/10 @ 12:03

  • lordofthedunce #14 2 years ago

    @sebsal
    I can finish a game and only have received 40% of achievements. I usually cant be bothered playing through again on Impossible difficulty or searching every corner of a map for hidden seagulls.

    So for me, it not worth the effort just for some points on a meaningless score

    I think that's about right for doing the main bit of a game.

    The rest are there for the kind of exploration you do if you have enough time, which most people don't, or a are a completionist.

    I am neither, any more, but there was a time (Master System/SNES days) when I'd trawl every part of a game just for the hell of it. I like the fact that Achievements are now put in there as a way of many devs recognising that some people do play games that way.

    A Gamerscore is good for those who care and really shouldn't bother those who don't. And even though I don't count my score (honest), it's still a bit pleasing when the things pop up on screen!

    Making them any easier wouldn't change the amount of time I put into a game.

  • Vice.Destroyer #15 2 years ago

    @RedPanda
    If you were going to look for the pigeons with a map and YouTube (like I did. Any other way would simply be INSANE), then you might as well have gone the whole hog and used the cheats to make the police disappear after you have loosened off a few rounds in the city.

    Just saying :)

  • Murton #16 2 years ago

    They're not too hard, just some take unreasonable amount of time doing something that the player doesn't really want to do. 10k ranked MP kills achievement/trophies are perhaps the best example.

    GTA4's "Auf Wiedersehen Mr Petrovik" also springs to mind, win a multiplayer game on every map of every game mode.

  • TeaFiend #17 2 years ago

    I think the problem is that many developers do not make the achievements correctly. There are lots for "collect 100% of items", but nothing for smaller percantages. Players would want a staggered reward, not all or nothing.

    They are good for rewarding players to try something different, to explore a bit further or attempt something that will require practise. They are not good for being impossible tasks. For something VERY hard there should be a 0G achievement. A badge of honour, not a challenge many avoid.

  • muscleblade #18 2 years ago

    I earn every achievement in most games. Some are ridiculously tedious so i skip those. I like the ones for completing games on the highest difficulty. I hate collection and mp achievements if the mp isnt good.

  • rosshuts #19 2 years ago

    The achievements are a nice touch, but I am not driven by acheivements when playing games. Anyone seen the achievement wh*res clip on youtube? Funny stuff!!

  • Inquisitor #20 2 years ago

    I've always thought you should get around 55% for completing the game, (be that through level linked achievements or weapon / collectable achievements you can't miss, whatever) 20% maximum for multiplayer achievements and a further 25% for slightly more obscure things...Yea, quite sad to actually think about it I suppose but games like FEAR really take the piss when you complete the game and get about 50 points as reward, it's actually rare for many people to complete games anyway!

  • Dr_Wadd #21 2 years ago

    Further to the comments about multiplayer achievements, there are plenty of achievements that aren`t just hard to get now, they are potentially impossible. If you need to play multiplayer matches on an older game that has lost its audience, or game that never managed to attract a large online crowdy you are basically scuppered. There's a barely played copy of Chromehounds sitting on my shelf, personally I`m not bothered by this fact, but there will be a raft of achievements there I can`t get even if I wanted to.

    If I had my way then then either there would be no mulitplayer achievements, or they would have two means of obtaining them, either offline or online. Probably wouldn`t really work with a game like Chromehounds, but there are plenty of other titles where it would.

  • Hantheman #22 2 years ago

    No, they're not hard just require extra commitment which most people wont bother with.

  • hiddenranbir #23 2 years ago

    I don't bother to commit the time to be so obsessive to get them all.

    The achievements I've earned are the ones I've just got from my normal playing pattern. Not gone out my way to get a specific one.

  • bigtechno #24 2 years ago

    and the 4% that get all of them are cheats that use sites to get other people to help them get the multi-player ones

  • muscleblade #25 2 years ago

    "If you were going to look for the pigeons with a map and YouTube (like I did. Any other way would simply be INSANE)"

    If you need a map or guide to get the achievement then the achievement is too difficult. I like the "find 100 diarys" in Bioshock 2
    as there is 125+ diarys so you dont need to find every single one but you cant ignore them either. Developer take note for future collection achievements.

  • lordofthedunce #26 2 years ago

    @EarlBassett

    Can't you switch off Notifications?

  • DrizztP #27 2 years ago

    I don't think achievement have enough clout for a lot of people to encourage obtaining them, I like getting achievements cause they offer challenges within a game but most of the time I've moved on to something new to be bothers with collection quests. L4D2 and Halo get kudos for offering some sort of reward in the form of avatar unlocks.

  • muscleblade #28 2 years ago

    @EarlBassett

    You cant turn off the messages popping up when you earn achievements from the dashboard.

  • nuanimal #29 2 years ago

    Are Acheivements too hard?

    It's a fair question, but I never thought of them as needing to be easy? And with or without them, shouldn't affect your ehjoyment of a game.

    I've always thought of them as a throwback to old skool high scores, like a badge of honour. What annoys me are the pointless ones you get, for actually completing the tutorial or doing something so stupidly linear (you had to do it in the game anyway) and getting one for that!

    It's like having you mother congratualte you for using the potty. And your 25.

  • Darren #30 2 years ago

    I couldn't care less about Achievements or Trophies one way or the other and actually don't tend to take much notice of either these days.

    Having no interest in multiplayer and being a Silver subscriber on the 360 (which means instant loss of 30%-50% of Achievement points for games with multiplayer anyway!), I tend only to complete the single player game once (if it's good enough to make me want to!) and leave it at that. I don't actively seek out 100% of the Achievements like some do, mostly because by that point another new game is demanding my attention and time!

    I guess it's nice to see the game acknowledging your progress though a game but other than that I don't see the worth of Achievements/Trophies really and I can't say that I miss either on the PC or even the Wii (when I play on it). In the early days of the 360 I actually found Achievements a distraction - oooh there's an easy 50 points, I'll see if I can get that, etc., etc. - but thankfully I quickly got over that.

    If people want them then great but I don't think I'd miss them at all if Microsoft and Sony dropped them for their next generation machines.

  • FireMonkey #31 2 years ago

    Multiplayer achievements are the main ones I don't get as I never play on-line (I have kids and too many other responsibilities, so occasionally only manage a few hours game time a month so not worth joining Gold).

    I wish they would separate on-line and off-line achievements.

  • miiiguel #32 2 years ago

    Most ppl simply don't even complete the games, let alone be thorough to the point of doing the Achievements.

  • Hermiod #33 2 years ago

    Multiplayer achievements don't help. Ridiculous ones where 100 people have to be playing the game all at the same time are the worst, but any achievement where you have to play online at all is a non-starter.

    Games should have bots or skirmish modes where people can play the multiplayer part of the game on their own.

  • Xerx3s #34 2 years ago

    "Agreed on the multiplayer achievements. Get rid of them I say."

    Nah. Halo 3 showed how to do it properly: nearly all achievements are either SP only OR can be unlocked in both SP and MP.

    I'd say that most achievements aren't achievements at all. More like an "I finished the basics award". ME2 is a clear offender in this. You can run through the game in one go and unlock nearly all achievements without even trying. ME1 was much better in this as it made you want to replay the game and see all the differences.

  • Gastrian #35 2 years ago

    Personally I prefer the way Mass Effect did it. Rack up a million credits? We'll give you an acheivement and unlock the spectre gear for you. Get 150 kills with the rifle? We'll allow you to add the rifle specialisation for all future playthroughs regardless of class shown and etc.

    If games threw us some minor rewards like Mass Effect, bonus content like interviews and out-takes (like the pre-DLC generation did) or even wall papers and avatar clothing more people would want to go out hunting for these achievment points.

  • Darren #36 2 years ago

    As for Achievements being too hard... well some of them are but some demand so much time that they just aren't worth the effort. I remember playing Ridge Racer on the 360 for over 20 hours and unlocking tons of stuff, making good progress through the game and all I got for my efforts were 115 lousy Achievement points. Also Blue Dragon was a game I invested 30 hours in and played right up to the final battle. My reward... 95 points! I think that game was the turning point for me when I realised that many Achievements were just not going to be worth the effort getting them and I just focused on playing and enjoying the games.

  • schnide #37 2 years ago

    Achievements change the way I play games, and probably not for the better. I'm not an achievement whore, and I don't want to be, but when I was playing the EXCELLENT Dead Space I noticed there was an achievement for completing the game with only the plasma cutter. I then did that, rather than test out the new guns as I otherwise would have.

    I've played it through a second time though, trying out new weaponary.. Otherwise, I wouldn't have been able to get the achievements for completing it on Impossible or owning all the guns.

    ;)

  • PoundHound #38 2 years ago

    Thaty was a disappointing article. I expected more analysis. :(

    I think I'm averaging around 600gs per game. I know a very big reason why that isn't higher - online achievments. It'd have been intersting to see a breakdown of percentages of online and offline gamerscore attained.

    The small amount of stats we did get tell me that a lot of people don't finish games.

  • lennon #39 2 years ago

    Whats really missing from achievements in my opinion is the ability to show your best ones off. For example having beaten the last two COD's on Veteran it would be good to be able to say these are the best achievements I have or look I scored 100% completion in this game. It needs a gallery of some sort where you can pick and choose.

  • darkmorgado #40 2 years ago

    I think it depends on the game. But I agree that many achievements seem to be based on collecting pointless guff for the sake of it, and that many people seem to chuck these collectibles in just to pad out the length of their game or to put a bullet point on the back of the box.

    I have to say though that, generally, although Xbox started the trend for achievements, they are no longer the best in the industry when it comes to implementation. The best-implemented system is, (and I know people will neg me just for mentioning the name) World of Warcraft. Some of them are genuinely funny to achieve, some are achieved at random, there are achievements to encourage you to try out every different part of the game, achievements for working together, etc etc. And in WoW they are not just pointless points (haha) but some of them give you fun things like titles, mounts, pets, etc etc. I think more games should things like this. If I was playing an xbox game, and I knew I got some interesting item for getting a particular achievement, I would be more likely to go for it.

    This is where Avatar gear should be used a lot more than it is, IMHO - achieving something in the game unlocks new gear for your avatar to wear (which can't be obtained anywhere else), which can then be used as a badge of honour in avatar games and things.

  • Darren #41 2 years ago

    @Gastrian - Totally agree. A physical reward for achieving something in a game, be it a gamer picture, theme, new armour, level or weapon, is far more satisfying than being told you've earned 10 points! These days though the publishers prefer to ignore those and sell them on as DLC!!!

  • Jonny5Alive7 #42 2 years ago

    It would be good if there was a way of knowing how close you are to getting a promotion. That would be good for the ones where you have to collect things or get a certain amount of kills. It would probably spur you on a bit if you could see the statistics, GTAIV has that in it a bit but it isn't always that clear.

  • Hermiod #43 2 years ago

    Personally, I've gotten so fed up with achievements that I've put my list on private and turned the notifications off. I couldn't tell you what my gamerscore is anymore.

  • StooMonster #44 2 years ago

    I find it frustrating when one complete a game on regular settings and the achievement count is 30% of total; the rest are gained by replaying the game (not going to do that) or by collecting loads of tiny things in obscure locations or doing certain moves a number of times etc. (not going to do that either).

    I only have enough time to play a game once, and certainly don't want to waste lots of time schlepping around rather than following main story; so 30%-ish is what I get for completing a game.

  • sneetch #45 2 years ago

    Completely agree with anomagnus, a lot of achievements are simply off-putting to me, for me multiplayer ones are the worst as I don't do multi-player on Xbox.

    I also hate missable ones (in RPGs, for example, where you have a 50 hour game and you can't get back to an area you need to pick up something that you missed in order to complete some daft collect everything achievement) and of course the kind of achievements you mention.

    Mass Effect was the worst I saw for achievements, put me off playing the game (I've since stopped thinking of achievements as part of the game, it was liberating). It had the Ally achievements where you'd get an achievement for playing through the entire game with a specific ally, this defeats the purpose of having multiple allies in your party IMO: if you play the game like you "should" and take the right people on the right missions then you're "punished" by missing out on achievements (not to mention that you'd need at least 3 complete play-throughs in order to obtain all the achievements).

    Potentially achievements are a fantastic reward system (as in, that little achievement unlocked noise makes you feel good and contributes to you wanting to continue playing) but they've been turned into a tedious slog by many games. If I made a game, you'd be able to get 1000 points from a single playthrough, they wouldn't be guaranteed, but you'd get most of them while completing the game. There's be no multiple playthroughs required to get the "You took the left path/You took the right path" style achievements at least. It would also be the most awesome game ever in the history of ever. ;)

  • Hermiod #46 2 years ago

    @StooMonster - Plus frakking one.

    Finishing a game on any difficulty should get you 1,000 points. Collecting loads of hidden crap should just unlocked bonuses, not achievements.

  • altitude2k #47 2 years ago

    Some people like them, some people don't. I'm the sort of person who will try not to let achievements ruin the first run through of a game, but going back and aiming to collect more is a nice way to extend the life of the single player.

  • Jackface #48 2 years ago

    As others have said, and I echo: multiplayer achievements will almost never be achieved by someone like me, and anything that pointlessly requires me to find 100 feathers of 100 orbs or 100 packages or 100 pigeons etc will also be given short shrift. No interest in doing that. I'd rather play the game itself.

  • darkmorgado #49 2 years ago

    @FireMonkey

    I wish they would separate on-line and off-line achievements.

    THIS.

    I remember moaning either on here or on CVG ages ago that I wish they split GS into two lists - online and offline, as it can look really annoying when you have got all the offline achievements in a game but your score shows 500/1000 because you don't like playing online/aren't a gold subscriber. I appreciate that it might be tricky to implement, and may not be retroactive (wasn't there a problem around trying to retrofit them into xbox1 titles?) but I think it's definitely something they need to look at, and it would throw up some interesting statistics about how people play their games.

  • ryn.x #50 2 years ago

    Crackdown is a good example of how Achievements can be done quite well in my opinion.

  • SwashbucklingStuff #51 2 years ago

    Assasin's Creed 2 were generally good although you got an absurd amount at the start for basically getting the game into the disc drive.

  • secombe #52 2 years ago

    With so many 'online' acheivements I'm not surprised, I'm 100hrs into NHL 10 and have about 100 points from it. Even worse if you dob't buy games within 6 months of release and the community is already as good as gone.

  • DiamondIce #53 2 years ago

    My average is around 700/1000 if I care enough for the game.

    I don't have the staying power for a full 1000/1000!!

    Edit: I have just gone back to playing PGR4 and I don't like achievements, for example, like finish 2nd with Bloc Party playing, or stupid unskillful ones found in other games. I like plain-and-boring ones that reward you for completing on the hardest difficulty setting.
    Edited by 1 at 15/03/10 @ 12:44

  • Jackface #54 2 years ago

    Another thing they should do: remove the 'points' element. They are, ironically, pointless.

  • Slamhound #55 2 years ago

    Someone want to throw a dictionary with the definition of "Achievement" bookmarked at this guy?

    ACHIEVEMENT UNLOCKED: Snarky Comment Post

    Whoa, that was easy.

  • Shakey_Jake33 #56 2 years ago

    Achievements are supposed to be 'rewards' for achieving something special in a game. I'd say the majority of achievements are too easy, pointless 'level completion' ones or 'collect X items' etc. They are 'achievements' in the loosest definition of the term. Achievements that are unlocked through standard progression of the game without doing someone extraordinary are a bit bizarre to me.

    I'd say the statistic shows that people largely don't care about them, aside from the vocal core. Myself, I might smile when the little 'achievement unlocked' notification appears on screen, but I won't endure a game I'm already finished with just for the gamerscore.

  • Apostle #57 2 years ago

    I just hate those multiplayer achievements solely aimed at stopping you selling the game or trading it in. GRID, Gears of War, BC1, all are guilty. "Earn rank 50 online", "Get to rank 100 online" and "Kill 10, 203 people online (Beans Bullets Bandages achievement I think)" respectively. Any one of these will take hours and hours, it becomes a grind and I for one can't be bothered.

  • Toothball #58 2 years ago

    Quite a lot of the time, I don't get most of the achievements in a game as I end up playing another one instead. There's so many of them out there it's not always easy to spend enough time to get the majority of achievements in a game.

  • hiruu #59 2 years ago

    HECK NO! The hardest Achievements are for the people who dedicate the time and effort to getting them...1000 Achievement Scores should be a free ride!

  • Zomoniac #60 2 years ago

    My worst achievement award: Pigeons in GTAIV

    No, the worst achievement by far is Ton Up in FIFA 10 (and the equivalent in FIFA 08). Win 100 ranked online matches, except if you're winning and somebody quits in the 90th minute, you might get awarded a 3-0 win but it doesn't count towards the achievement. And the win stat doesn't reflect this, so you have no idea how close you are to the win. It's not uncommon to need 300 wins before you get it.

  • sneetch #61 2 years ago

    @Jackface
    Another thing they should do: remove the 'points' element. They are, ironically, pointless.

    I agree with that, I prefer PS3 Trophies and Steam Achievements to the Xbox ones now.

  • kinky_mong #62 2 years ago

    @Darren:

    Having no interest in multiplayer and being a Silver subscriber on the 360

    Impressive shoehorning of that fact into a comments section. See if you can get it into a PS3 game review as well, they're might still be some people who don't know yet.

  • DiamondIce #63 2 years ago

    @Shakey_Jake33 +1 regarding achievements being a reward etc.

    I have to be honest and say that achievements have added something a little extra for me. My completion rate pre-Xbox 360 was awful. I now get at least two playthroughs out of games I like by going for achievements on the hardest difficulty. Therefore they have added extra value to games for me.

  • midnight_walker #64 2 years ago

    So in summary, people want separate MP and solo achievements so that their solo achievement score can be as big as possible if they don't do MP, people want some achievements taken out because they're too hard to get, and also, people don't actually care about achievements.
    Edited by 1 at 15/03/10 @ 12:54

  • GamesConnoisseur #65 2 years ago

    For me its depends on a game, and its great when used to make you go a bit further than you would have, ie trying out all the weapons when would have stuck to the gun and get an inferior experience.

    There are loads of good examples, and I DONT try to get 100 percent if I m not going to have fun. That is the first rule for me, why bother if you just get bored, frustrated or annoyed?

    So its there and available for the most hardcore!

    IF everyone can easily get almost 80 to 100 percent of achievements/trophies, THEN that will devalues the whole system of being challenging!

  • LR100 #66 2 years ago

    Some achievements are ridiculous, like ones where you have to beat one of the games dev team in multiplayer, or like in Brothers in arms, where it rewards you for playing every day for a few months or going back to the game after not playing it for a while. I am not that big on achievements, I have 11,000 odd g out of a possibly 95,000 odd g from all the games I have. I just can't really be bothered! Almost all of the achievements i've unlocked have been purely from playing the game, the ones you earn just from completing a level! That's good enough for me.

  • FTM #67 2 years ago

    the only game I have got the lot on is borderlands..but then they added the crawermax and it maxing it out again is eluding me!

  • Caimbeul #68 2 years ago

    Some are insanely hard, others require stupid amounts of repeated play/commitment. I would say that they could be amde a bit easier. Mass Effect 2's are realistic i think. As were Bioshock 1's.

  • Spekingur #69 2 years ago

    A game where the main group of achievements is in the multiplayer is not fun.

  • makariel #70 2 years ago

    I don't care about achievements. I don't really get it why I should play the game in a fashion I don't want to just to get some stupid points.

  • miiiguel #71 2 years ago

    So in summary, people want separate MP and solo achievements so that their solo achievement score can be as big as possible if they don't do MP, and also, people don't actually care about achievements.

    Funny, innit? Anyway I look at the Achievements as Panini stickers, I do love to collect them but I do not do them on a competitive context, and I think ppl who have a problem with the system tend to look at them as that.

    I'd say, if one doesn't like it, just don't do them, forget about it. It doesn't matter. We can still be friends.
    Edited by 1 at 15/03/10 @ 13:07

  • kangarootoo #72 2 years ago

    "Does this mean Achievements are too hard?"

    This has probably already been said multiple times in this thread, but my 2p is...

    1. They aren't too hard, they are just often for things I have no interest in doing. Achivements that result from me playing the game the way I want to play it are good, but ones that involve arbitrary (and often "not very fun or interesting";) behaviour are not.

    Oblivion had good achivements. It is the only game I ever completed in that regard.


    2. Achievement lists that require lots of competetive online play can kiss my ass. A whole bunch of RB6 and L4D achivements (for example) will never appear on my list, ever.


    3. I don't give a hoot about my gamer score. I quite like achivements if they are "good" ones, but I don't care about the score they contribute to, at all.

  • kangarootoo #73 2 years ago

    Furthermore, achivements often feel like a publisher/devloper's way of getting me to see all the stuff they spent development money on developing.

    If I play an RPG that has 5 different paths, I very much appreciate the choices that will present to me in gameplay. That does NOT necessarily mean I want to play the game 5 times to witness every decicion, dungeon and line of dialogue contained therein. What I certainly do NOT want is an achivement list that can only completed by doing exactly that.

    You are still getting paid mister developer! Don't act like I can ask you for 50% of my money back if I only see 50% of the game content.

  • chub #74 2 years ago

    JRPG achievements can be pretty hard to get, as they're often of the 'get 100%'-type ones. They're especially bad if you miss one small thing early on, and later realise that you needed a walkthrough guide just to not miss anything. Yes Eternal Sonata, I'm looking at you.

  • 00.00.01 #75 2 years ago

    Achievements/Trophies just come along as I play. Am no Trophy-whore, the only thing I get annoyed with is finishing a game on 'hard' only to see that that doesn't mean I've unlocked the reward for finishing the game on 'regular' as well.
    That just doesn't make sense.
    Am not going yto replay a game on 'regular' after finishing on 'hard', only to get the reward.

  • Geordiemp #76 2 years ago

    Borderlands almost got it right, do something good and get better guns.

    Justa shame the quality of the gun should be best after beating the harder bosses witha bit of randomisaton...

  • MightyMouse #77 2 years ago

    Personally I love achievements, even the ubiquitous 'find x number of hidden items' type if done properly (ie Batman AA rather than Assassin's Creed). Multiplayer achievements however, as others have noted, are the spawn of the devil.

    The thing is a lot of games aren't really interesting enough for me to bother completing everything. In something like Uncharted you want to see all of it, whereas Ninja Gaiden for me was just a bit boring (will of course vary). I don't think you should expect people to 100% every game they own just for that reason. It doesn't mean they're too hard, you just don't have to want to do them all.

    Difficult achievements are great if they are actually just difficult but things which turn into a grind are irritating as hell. It's not an achievement to have spent 10 hours looking for flags, it's a sign that you should be doing something else.

  • muscleblade #78 2 years ago

    "oooh there's an easy 50 points, I'll see if I can get that"

    Its getting the hard ones thats fun. Completing a game on the hardest difficulty is more often than not a very rewarding experience imo. Much better than a normal difficulty playthrough. Getting an achievement for it just make it even better. Getting all stars in MW2 special ops is also rewarding and getting an achievement is a bonus.

  • dr_faulk #79 2 years ago

    Dear Microsoft / Xbox developers,


    I have a baby on the way, and am trying to rennovate a house, as well as find a new job.

    Please stop making games so complex that I feel like I am not getting my money's worth.

    Thanks you,


    dr_faulKzkzZZ

  • kangarootoo #80 2 years ago

    I think where some achivements fall down for me, regardless of their difficulty, is where the task they require is too specific.

    Examples.
    Dead Space had a "complete the game using just weapon X" (I forget its name), now that might be a perfectly hardcore thing to do, but it kind of requires that you dismiss the whole weapon aquisition and upgrading part of the game. A feature that the devs obviously thought it would be fun for players to be engaged with. So why would you have an achievement that basically asks you to NOT USE a fun part of the game (I realise this is quite a hardcore achievement, requiring maybe a second playthrough, but all the same).

    Imagine if Oblivion had a "shoot twenty goblins in the head with an arrow" achievement. All the barabarian and wizard players would be thinking "so much for character choice diversity". Thankfully, Ob did nothing of the sort. All their achivements boiled down to "go adventuring a lot", which suited me just fine.

  • scorpius45 #81 2 years ago

    I always thought achievements and trophys needed some sort of reward for getting full completion for example 200 ms points.

  • Steroyd #82 2 years ago

    There's no incentive to get achievements when there isn't that super excalibur+ sword at the end of it, or a golden gun or unlockable cheats, there's mostly never a game breaking item that would just lets you dick around the game. Uncharted 2 is an example of how it should be done.

  • Spekingur #83 2 years ago

    If I remember right, Just Cause 1 achievements weren't terrible at all.

  • Irien #84 2 years ago

    Having just finished both Risen and Magna Carta 2, both with only about 2/3 of achievements, there's definately a "what not to do" for lengthy RPG achievements.

    Risen has a variety of game-spanning achievements which break easily if you don't know what you're doing. One requires you to get 100% in all 3 attributes. However, 100% = a score of 200. You can only get to 100 by levelling up, and there's only enough to power up one stat in terms of in-game items. This means a) multiple play throughs, and b) if you use items early, you'll never get to 100%. The only way to get such achievements is to play the game in a pre-defined way, which is entirely un-natural in a free-flowing game.

    Magna Carta had similar problems. Maxing out skill trees required more skill points than were readily available in-game, meaning that you really had to use the paid-for DLC coupled with extra point-generating abilities. It also had easily-missable stuff which you couldnt' then go back and rectify, thus breaking achievements.

    An example of RPG achievements done right would be Lost Odyssey (although even that had one or maybe 2 achievements which broke too easily).

    Sadly achievement implementation is an *art*, and most developers don't really seem to "get it".

  • sfp_noodle #85 2 years ago

    heres the reason why i think online achievements shud be binned - xbox charges to play online, ps3 does not. why shud a non xbox live member have to miss out on MP heavy achievements because they dnt wanna pay for live? food for thought

  • DiamondIce #86 2 years ago

    @kangarootoo

    I would never attempt to complete the game with only the one weapon. The whole fun part is to experiment with different weapons / upgrades. Again, it funnels you down a specific play-style which I don't like.

    I did get the achievement for not using a gun/killing anyone in Mirror's Edge. That game was not geared towards shooting everyone-and-everything and thus I think this was a rewarding achievement.

  • Mavrik123 #87 2 years ago

    XBOX 360 Achievements

    achievement |əˈ ch ēvmənt|
    noun
    1 a thing done successfully, typically by effort, courage, or skill : to reach this stage is a great achievement.


    I have been an Xbox gamer since the very release of the xbox way back on the 14th of March 2002 and one thing i really like since the release of xbox 360 is the achievements when i first bought my 360 i never cared a bit about the achievements system, but as i continued to play i enjoy sitting down and trying to complete certain achievements within a game as it helps hone my skills and i come away from the game feeling i have achieved something that was actually rather difficult and i stuck with it to get the problem sorted.

    Why does anyone buy a xbox360 game? Is it solely for the achievements that come with the game, or is it the fact that a game is released that you will enjoy and wanted to play since it’s announcement?

    personally I buy a game because it looks cool i will enjoy it and get a good load of hours play time out of it not because I get an extra badge, medal, ribbon or reward which is around 200x200 pixels on a screen. Not to say i don’t enjoy every time i see my xbox logo pop up telling me i got a new achievement, it makes me feel i’m achieving things as i play through the game.

    The people that dislike achievements would prefer all achievements to be removed from all 360 games or would you like them all to be made easier so that any tom, dick or harry can earn them?

    end of the day achievements are just an added extra the game designers have put a lot of time and effort into thinking up and using it to put a personal touch to each of there games, they don’t need to do it and we all survived fine before it was around. There is no benefit for the user playing the game to get 100% achievement reward is there? bar bragging rights to their mates.

    If you have not got the skill to master an area of a game to get an achievement you basically have to man up and get better or not care so much about your gamer score.

  • muscleblade #88 2 years ago

    I have 100% completion in 58 games.

    I think Bayonetta, Batman, MW2, AC2 had very good achievement lists. Challenging, but not tedious or too timeconsuming.
    I have the full 1000 in those and enjoyed every second of getting there.

  • Slipstream #89 2 years ago

    Magna Carta had similar problems. Maxing out skill trees required more skill points than were readily available in-game, meaning that you really had to use the paid-for DLC coupled with extra point-generating abilities. It also had easily-missable stuff which you couldnt' then go back and rectify, thus breaking achievements.

    Tsk tsk, that's naughty isn't it...

    Hmm I think it's the first Ghost Recon that comes to mind here, something about an achievement to rank 'Number 1 in the World leaderboards?' I always thought that was pretty harsh =/

    Some achievements are hard and rightfully so, games that strike a balance and reward you for dedication, that's truly earning achievements.
    However making them nigh on impossible or simple a bore, well, we are only human, not all of us have the time that some of the developers would have us spend upon their title.

    It's about striking a balance, and also if you are truly mad about 100% achievements and trophies; wise purchasing decisions.
    For example, unless you're willing to learn the ropes for Street Fighter don't expect to earn half of the achievements, the majority of players I'd wager are guilty of this, but then the majority of us I'm sure, aren't in it for Tropies, just a good time.

  • LR100 #90 2 years ago

    Some games, like FF13 and Splosion Man do give you unlockable gamer pics and stuff, which is the right way to go about achievements and doing things in game

  • M4RKYB #91 2 years ago

    I like achievements to be tricky but realistically attainable (i nearly said achievable). Really don't like the multiple playthrough ones though, they're a cop-out, as everyone else has said we just don't have the time or inclination to complete a game multiple times apart from very rare occasions. The Fallout 3 ones were great because they was mostly about exploration and mission completion, but they really let the side down by including ones for reaching different levels of the game with good/neutral/evil karma, because you either had to play the game 3 times, and considering I was up to about 140 hours last time I checked that ain't gonna happen, or cheat and reload old saves and kill everyone in Megaton just before you hit the level threshold.
    I'd much rather have them than not though, and if implemented properly they can really bring an extra level of satisfaction to a game. Tangible awards such as avatar gear, gamer pics, wallpapers etc are a must for the future though.

  • darkmorgado #92 2 years ago

    If I remember rightly, Final Fantasy 11 on Xbox remains the only title in existence that noone has EVER achieved 1000 points on.

    The reason? It has an achievement requiring you to reach the maximum character level with EVERY SINGLE character class and MAXIMUM profession. Im sure I read something somewhere that said it would actually take you a couple of YEARS of consistent play to get that far.

  • Byzanite #93 2 years ago

    i think it depends on the game how hard the achievements are, or whether the game can hold the interest of the gamer in order to play the game to the end.

  • kangarootoo #94 2 years ago

    "theyre only too hard if you are an absolute sissy"

    That must be it. I wuss out at the idea of repetative boredom ;)

  • mr_shoe_uk #95 2 years ago

    Finally, people are realising most achievements suck, and simply take away the feeling of satisfaction you used to get for 'merely completing' something.

  • Zomoniac #96 2 years ago

    I don't know what's worse, the fact that in about 4 hours I'll be the third person on the whole of EG to get 1,250G on FIFA 10, or the fact that I'm so distraught that I've just discovered 2 others have done it already and I won't be the first. Damn you, darkgoliat and seamuslfc. Damn you both to hell.

  • mkreku #97 2 years ago

    I just remember the achievements in Fallout 3. "Getting out of the Vault" = X amount of achievement points. Really? Did anyone actually play the entire game inside the vault? Was it really an achievement of me to be able to exit the vault? Was I one of the few lucky ones who got out?

    The problem with achievements is that Microsoft is forcing every game to have 1000 of them. Naturally, some of them are going to be less than cleverly thought out.

  • miiiguel #98 2 years ago

    @ white_frank_white : It's kinda weird though, that "Achievements threads" are always a big success, alwyas >100 post, mainly *most ppl* saying "I don't care...". It's funny, as well.
    Edited by 2 at 15/03/10 @ 14:24

  • miiiguel #99 2 years ago

    "The problem with achievements is that Microsoft is forcing every game to have 1000 of them.

    huh? Minimum number for Achievements is 5 (five) not 1000. Where the heck did hear that? No game has 1000 Achievements.

    And for GamerScore there's no minimum, just a maximum of 1000 per game (than you have DLC). There are games with less than 1000 Gamerscore (Condemned; Lord of the Rings).
    Edited by 2 at 15/03/10 @ 14:30

  • robg #100 2 years ago

    Good achievements: Modern Warfare 2
    Bad Achievements: Mass Effect

  • TheBoyChris #101 2 years ago

    Different types of achievements appeal to different players. Look at the Bartle test (which is quoted in the Achievements XDK white paper...)

    At one point the average achievement points being achieved per game was below 100. Not sure what it is now, but I remember it went up to around 300 once Microsoft started pushing people to make them more accessible.

  • lukaz #102 2 years ago

    Don't forget about borrowed games that are played for a short time only.

    Some games can be completed (regarding to the gamerscore) in a day, other require hundreds of hours. Not fair.

  • Johnhost #103 2 years ago

    Most games have tolkin achievements you get for doing the tutorial and such. These don't really mean you have done much. Achievements should mean something it should mean you did something significant. Some are really silly and online achievements I hate (unless it's an only only game like BF 1943). But overall it should be there to show off your....achievements in the game.

  • AllMetal #104 2 years ago

    Some gamers also only get the single player ones and vice-versa on multiplayer; personally I think if they were tied to rewards (themes, Avatar things, etc) it would make them more interesting to go after

  • FortysixterUK #105 2 years ago

    Yep they are too hard.
    Every game should reward you , upon completion of the singleplayer element, with at least 800 GS, the remaining 200 GS can be awared IF the game has multiplayer, and for no other reason.
    You own the game, why the hell should you not get the Gamer Score?
    Also , Gamerscore & Trophies are as annoying as fuck, because if you don't get them these days, you feel like you've missed something.
    On the other hand they are a genius marketing ploy, as in reality, they give you a meaningless and useless score to aim for.
    Xbox and Sony should look at a way of rewarding you every 10K's worth of GS or Trophy, maybe with marketplace points.
    WOW does it best however, with the achievements, that yield real rewards ( The Azure Drake, pets etc )

  • muscleblade #106 2 years ago

    "I just remember the achievements in Fallout 3. "Getting out of the Vault" = X amount of achievement points. Really"

    Story related achievements like this are fine. Its actually an achievement for completing the intro of the game. Nothing wrong with that. No game has a thousand achievements. The orange box has most with one hundred different achievements. The norm is around 50.

  • miiiguel #107 2 years ago

    You own the game, why the hell should you not get the Gamer Score?

    I don't understand what you're saying? You're sugesting that the gamerscore should be included when you buy a game? Like in a code? That makes no sense, imo. Achievements are a fun adition to a game (if you like to collect them, like in playing to get them), or doesn't mean anything if you don't like that sort of stuff. Being "entitled to it because one bought the game" is a strange idea. It's like you should be able to always defeat the last boss, since you paid for the game?!
    Anyway, on the "meaningless" department (reason most shouted on every thread), I have to agree, it is meaningless, like playing a game is. Unless you have fun with it.
    Edited by 1 at 15/03/10 @ 15:07

  • etherfiend #108 2 years ago

    Achievements are tough to balance. You don't want everyone getting 1000 points as it just demeans the system and renders it pointless. There are people like myself who don't really do online multiplayer and thus lose out there and others that prefer to game casually rather than grind it out (oh hello Seriously 2.0 - 100,000 kills GoW2) like an MMO. 24 hours reloading the Brumack level or forever being in a multiplayer lobby...no thanks.

    Initially I think a lot of games (especially JRPGs) didn't think through what they were actually asking...levelling all Blue Dragon characters and all the shadows to 99 - well into the 150 hour mark. The problem was exacerbated by the lack of things to do because standard fights were walkovers and 'legendary' monster bosses were too tough (king poo for example).

    As time has gone on, Mass Effect & Mass Effect 2 being the perfect example,things have improved. I've generally found achievments for random things (blowing up 8 chickens with a grenade in MW2, etc) remain but the time-sinking achievements are becoming less. With the constant stream of games I think it has dawned that people aren't going to spend hundreds of hours grinding a couple of achievements when they can get loads more (and more fun too) by playing something new, especially when Gamerscores aren't quite the e-peen they were maybe intended to be.

    The ME2 achievements are a vast improvement, I've gone through once and I think I've got at least 700 points out of it. I'll have almost all on 2 playthroughs but then the second playthrough is varied and I'll enjoy it unlike second playthroughs of Darksiders and Dead Space where nothing changes but the time taken to kill stuff - no enjoyment there.

    I think C&C3 had the worst of the lot where I did all the campaigns on gold yet it never unlocked the lower achievements, so you would have had to play through 3 times - one for each difficulty level...that was plain tedium and idiocy on the part of the achievement implementors. I never did bother going back, just like Dead Space, Conan, Viking, COD4, and so many others where I loved playing through but just once. Like many 'plot twist' films, I rarely want to watch them a second time for a long time, the fun is removed.

    Also any game that gives achievments for the hardest difficulty but requires you to unlock by completing on an easier setting makes my list of hatred (Eat Lead, Mass Effect & Dead Space I'm staring at you). At least Eat Lead had a code you could enter to unlock it right off the bat. I have no objection to hardest difficulty achievments, they are often worth striving for but not if you have to jump through hoops to get there.

  • miiiguel #109 2 years ago

    @ ether: King Poo is fairly easy, just have all your paty members with Double Cast and Resurrection (use 2 characters to do nothing but Suuport Magic and powerup the attackers) and *do not* use physical attacks. 2 Turns should do the trick.

  • Vordred #110 2 years ago

    i admit i do get alot of achievements on games, but some i really cant be bothered with. here is my list of achieves i dont like.

    1. in open world games, the collect 100 of these and 100 of those. thats just boring, time consuming and annoying. (infact collectables are just annoying in any game)

    2. again same sort of thing, the usual play 1000 games, or get 100,000 kills, things like that.

    3. now i dont mind multiplayer achievements, but i do hate the usual, must be done in ranked matches, because ranked matches annoy me, as they are usually over in 5 mins and you get kicked back out and have to find a new game. and people cant join on the fly, so you end up with people quiting and/or unbalenced team, just becomes a bit of a headache.

    4. difficulty achievements that dont stack.

    5. these are rare, "get to number 1 on the leaderboard" thats just plain stupid, as again that comes down to investing a ton of time into the game, and even then the top of the leaderboards are usually full of boosters

    so basically anything that is just a really long grind, thats just not fun.

  • SlackMaster #111 2 years ago

    The only achievements I have a problem with are those you have to grind for, like the kick a football 100 times in Bully. Things that aren't fun and aren't really part of the core experience. I'm also not a fan of online only achievements as if you don't play that game online there is no way to get them.

  • Fab4 #112 2 years ago

    Indeed, plus online achievements usually bring the dregs of XBL out into the sunlight. The ones who who will quite happily ruin online play for others just so they can easily get their precious gamerscore up a few points.

  • Batfink #113 2 years ago

    I had no idea you could turn the notification off. I'll be doing that!

  • 00.00.01 #114 2 years ago

    @ mkreku
    '"Getting out of the Vault" = X amount of achievement points.'
    What?!?!, You're telling me that I can get out? Have been waiting there since my 'birth'... F.F.S!!
    (p.s What's it like outside? Worth it?)

  • domoslaf #115 2 years ago

    The last achievement getting of which I enjoyed was the Ravenholm one from The Orange Box - it made you play an entire level with just a gravity gun. I would never make myself approach the level in such a manner if it weren't for the achievement, but it turned out to be a really awesome, enjoyable way to play.

    It's a pity that so few developers are willing to use the achievements that way - to encourage experimentation and discovering new ways of playing the game. Most of them are, as many of you said, awarded just for pointless grinding.
    Edited by 4 at 15/03/10 @ 16:45

  • Zomoniac #116 2 years ago

    Actually, I'd like to retract my previous statement. The worst achievements by quite some distance are the online belt ones in Fight Night 4. Championship belts that only one person can hold at any time. Except they're not obliged to accept challenges once they've won them, so they basically sell them to the highest bidder. The worst idea ever.

  • Acrid #117 2 years ago

    Trophies > Achievments

  • Frosty840 #118 2 years ago

    Too "forcing you to play boring multiplayer with pubescent consoletards".
    Too "collect every damn item in the game when you don't need them".
    Too "having to replay the game five times on every difficulty level".
    Too MEANINGLESS!
    Edited by 1 at 15/03/10 @ 17:00

  • BadDevotions #119 2 years ago

    L4D's achievements were the best ones imo. it made me play the game relentlessly - some were hard but they were all achievable.

  • abbot #120 2 years ago

    I like achievements best when they come with avatar awards like the t-shirts in L4D2. All achievements should give me an avatar item i say.

    Or how about achievements earn you MS points. That would get people interested. Doubt it would be a 1:1 ratio though. but 1:10 would be ok so you'd get 100 MS points if you did all achievements

  • curtlikesmeat #121 2 years ago

    I wouldn't say that they're too hard, just that I don't really care about them. I'll complete most games I buy which results in... I don't know... 30% of the achievements? But I'll never play on to get the rest, especially if it's just some silly collection thing. Why waste the time?

    I know that some people really like them though, and that's cool too.

  • curtlikesmeat #122 2 years ago

    Just remembered - when I first got a 360 years ago for a few minutes I thought that achievement points could be used to buy stuff from the marketplace.... I thought it was a masterstroke!! Unfortunately, I was wrong.

  • ziggy_played_guitar #123 2 years ago

    ah... fascinating theme...
    What is it? lots of ppl saying game rewards are meaningless? yes, they are, unless you have them. Pretty simple.

    The ratio is nothing new, not long ago a similar article stated most didn't pass level 10 in WoW. I suspect the majority of normal consumers don't finish the games. I suspect the same happened in previous gens, diference now is that you know.
    You kow, those pesky rewards! Now everybody knows we spend more time talking about games rather than playing them.

  • RobTheBuilder #124 2 years ago

    I remember seeing one along the lines of 'win 50 online gamer in a row' ... Yeah right. Crackdown is a good example for me of how to do it.

  • Akuma #125 2 years ago

    Not too hard, too time consuming.

  • septimus #126 2 years ago

    Most are grinding pointlessness, that rely mainly on random multiplayer skirmishes and thusly a complete ball ache.

    CoD MW2 for example... fuck and that when it comes to achievements/trophies.

    Come to think of it, I think I have only got 1000 complete, at the time, points on two games. One being Need For Speed Most Wanted.... mainly as that rewarded as you played through for sensible shit you were going to do anyway to complete the game. Wish more games did that.
    Edited by 1 at 15/03/10 @ 19:53

  • Ryze #127 2 years ago

    Yep, as said - Achievements aren't necessarily hard. I just don't have the time to chase around fetching or wandering to get some of these achievements.

    Some need serious time and dedication to grab. Don't have time right now. Some do! 4% maybe!

  • hibee #128 2 years ago

    For those who care about achievements I would imagine that they want them to be relatively difficult. What the data really show is that most people have pretty much the same attitude towards acheivements as they do venereal disease: they're both unfortunate consequences of otherwise fun activities.

    So now if the nice folks at microsoft would be so kind as to let me turn off the acheivement messages that would be grand; that way I can save all my unwanted news for the Bangkok GUM clinic instead...
    Edited by 2 at 15/03/10 @ 22:29

  • ziggy_played_guitar #129 2 years ago

    What the data really show is that most people have pretty much the same attitude towards acheivements as they do venereal disease: they're both unfortunate consequences of otherwise fun activities.
    Don't try to find a job as a data analist. It does not show nothing like that. If game rewards weren't a sucess it wouldn't be used, cloned, by Sony; Valve; Blizzard. If consumers didn't care about such initiatives you wouldn't have this article, nor these coments. You probably would have the same press Home or Miis have. I'm sorry for the analogy.

    So now if the nice folks at microsoft would be so kind as to let me turn off the acheivement messages that would be grand
    You also can do that.

  • Zomoniac #130 2 years ago

    Like most are saying, some are just too time consuming. FIFA10 probably gets the most hatred from me. It would need to be the only game you play for a whole six months for you to max it out.

    Having got the full 1,250 a few hours ago and checked my 360voice blog it seems I've played FIFA 10 for 60 days. So the equivalent of two months straight.

  • Barzan #131 2 years ago

    so they should be hard or they wont be achievements really.

  • hibee #132 2 years ago

    @ziggy - oops. I stand corrected on turning off the messages, though I doubt I'm the only person to have never found the toggle.

    I will stand by my data analysis though, as I did use the word "most" and my comparison with genital warts was (pretty obviously) facetious. While for some gamers achievements are hugely important I contend that the majority simply do not care one iota about them and that the quoted figures support this position: those 73% of gamers getting less than 50% of achievements look very much like people who just play through their games and pick up incidental gamerscore as they go (so that would be "most" then).

    Achievement systems are ubiquitous because in the grand scheme of game development they are cheap to implement and the less than 10% who really really care expect them. News stories on ahievements get a lot of replies on this site because the posting population of gaming sites is not representative of the wider gamer population: it likely carries a disproportionately high volume of that less-than-10%. Even here pro-achievement posts do not dominate. I suggest you might want to avoid that "data analist" [sic] career yourself.
    Edited by 5 at 15/03/10 @ 23:39

  • ShiroBen #133 2 years ago

    Most aren't 'too hard', they're just not fun.

  • plastickitty #134 2 years ago

    online only achievements are annoying especially if its an obscure game that not many people play online meaning some achievements can be impossible to get.

  • Gecks #135 2 years ago

    until you've beaten EDF on inferno, you've achieved nothing

    :)

  • Paulie_P #136 2 years ago

    I hate achievements and trophys but at the same time I hate looking at my profile more and seeing I've scored something like 12000 out of 50000 gs points or that I've achieved 35% of trophies in a game.

    I aim to get at least 50% of the achievements in a game or 500 points.

    The achievements in Street Fighter IV have put me off playing it as I do not have the skill to attain them so I will be giving SSIV a miss. On the other hand, I hated Assassin's Creed so much that I did not want it sitting on my Profile half empty and I got the 1000 points to spite the game.

    I also hate the achievements in Pro Evo/Fifa because they are nearly the same every year and its a slog to try and get them all repeatedly. I hate the way Little Big Planet has added the achievements for DLC I have no intent of purchasing to my score automatically.

    I am trying to get 100% on Batman:AA and Uncharted 2.