Do trophies ruin gaming experience?

[DreamyElf]

Hello everyone :)

so the question is: do trophies(achievements on xbox 360 and pc)
ruin/change your gaming experience?

NOTE: first of all i'm not here to judge anyone as everyone has the freedom to do (play in this case) whatever he/she likes. :)

i think most of gamers (born before 1995) grew and played videogames for mainly one reason: for fun.
But in 2008 trophy support came to ps3 and with that it came a new wave/generation of players,the known: trophy w****s/ hunters (mostly younger players)

these individual players usually play games for only one reason: collect as many trophies as they can even if that means playing games that they dont like.usually after they platinum a game they never play it gain. this happens mainly for two reasons:
1) they want to prove that they are hardcore gamers and perfectionists.
2) they want to get more attention and prove that they are "better" than common players/gamers.

Of course there are many gamers who find trophies rewarding and enjoyable and think they increase replayability.
Also there are many players (usually old-school gamers) that they dont care about trophies and still continue to play games for the reason they always did, for fun!

Personally i have many trophies only in games that i really like.
i always play/finish the game and then if i really like the game maybe i'll go for some trophies (if they are fun!). no way i'll play a game just for trophies!
i'll never change the way i'll play the game only for getting some trophies which in my opinion prove nothing in the end...

EDIT: i added a poll.(sorry for the mistake "trohies" instead of trophies but i cant change it...lol)

[Darkdrium777]

Like you I think they don't have fun playing certain games. I am not about to play games I don't like for "a trophy that isn't real... BUT IS" (Kevin Butler at E3 2010) but if I can Platinum a game I really like I will. But I will do that for games I really like only, and if any has online only trophies well that slashes the amount of time I want to put in it because these trophies often are ridiculous (Like Bling Brigade yes?)
But they do not ruin game experience, they do if they are ridiculous and you go after them. But if you know they are ridiculous and you don't go after them you can still have fun.
It gives the other type of person (trophy hunters) something to play games for. We play for fun, them maybe not so much for fun but more for the bragging rights. Honestly I let them brag, it's not a huge deal.

[ACE-FLO]

Granted there are kids who wanna play games just to get trophies. That's their fun, and it keeps em off the streets LOL Tbh, it doesnt bother me one bit :D For me though, A trophy is gimmicky - yep, I'm from the oldskool. Everytime I got a trophy, I thought, "ah, whatever" and carried on, I even got the beat zico by accident recently LOL. Not interested in trophies, just the online aspect of the game.

I don't see how they can ruin ones gaming experience, unless getting the trophy causes the system to crash :lol To me, seeing the lmessage that I earned a trophy is just like seeing a message that someone is now online :? no bother here...

[ProblemSolver]

I'm not completely against trophies, but if one looks at it, they are
superfluous. The way it is, is somehow just a cheap way to make a game look
more interesting then it possibly is. I for one think that trophies distract
from a game. A game should be fully self-contained. I want to play and enjoy
a game and not being judge by a trophy system whether I did something good
or wrong. That's just ridiculous.

I would trade the WipEout HD platinum trophy for a platinum skin any day.

Well, if I would had an option to be able to erase all my trophies and never
see any popping up ever again on the screen, I would use that option.

[Cyberio]

Trophies could be very fun (WipEout HD ones are one the best examples to how make a list of them), and yes, only shows how cool you are in the game: "Whoa, this guy has the platinum trophy of WipEout HD, what a hardcore gamer! Wow!" And nothing else. They are for that. But anyway, they also could be a representation of your progress in the game (if they are well implemented, another example is Mirror's Edge). Don't give more attention than it needs.
Is there a trophy of getting first without touching the second and third pilots in a race, and you want it? If you accept the challenge, go for it. In the end, even trophies are earned just for fun.

PS: Yes, i like trophies. I didn't buy any game only for trophies, considering it a waste of time, but i like earning platinums of the games i have, if there are not impossible.

[ACE-FLO]

The way it is, is somehow just a cheap way to make a game look more interesting then it possibly is.

I disagree with that, it doesn't make the game look cheap at all. Though I don't care for trophies, I think they do serve a purpose. Let me explain, back in the day, before online was ever an option - Once I clocked a game, that was it, nothing to do - if trophies were around back then, it would be another matter - replay value would increase! Yah, I know I said that trophies were gimmicky, and they are - but it's a neat lil gimmick.


I for one think that trophies distract from a game. A game should be fully self-contained. I want to play and enjoy a game and not being judge by a trophy system whether I did something good or wrong. That's just ridiculous.

How do they distract from a game? I fail to understand that. And the trophy system doesn't judge you by any means. I completed the campaign on elite diff, but never bothered trying for platinum, ever... does that mean I'm shite? Like I said before, I'm no trophy hunter - but have nothing against those who are...

That's not to say I'll never attempt to get a platinum trophy (already planning to make Deus Ex my first plat, and it isnt even released yet)... There are people who have hardcore interest in certain games, and when these games come out, these very same peeps will play the game, get all the trophies, and carry on playing the game online... for them, it's a more complete gaming experience... Just take a look at the Trancendents hall of fame list thread and you'll see what I mean, that doesn't mean they are skilled online now does it? I've had my fair share of wins online against platinum pilots, so the trophies don't reflect crap online, or allow you to be judged by any system therein. And it shouldnt make one feel that way either. Thts what I think :)

[RedScar]

Trophies are there to please those who want them. It reminds me back when BF2 came out and they had medals that show different acheievements like kills or time with a certain kit. People used to stat pad just to get them and ruin the fun for the rest of the server they were in. That is about the only thing I dislike about them is how ppl pad or farm just to get them. Outside that though I really don't care about them, the WOHD ones were cool because they are challenging but I've never really tried for them in any other game.

Trophies themselves don't ruin the game, but the community and how they go about getting and using ("my e-penis is bigger") the trophies does.

PS: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qlxZKUWXxiU for lols

[DreamyElf]

Ace,
it depends from the game and what kind of trophies it has.
f.e.: you play an adventure and the criteria are to complete the game under 5 hours (god of war) or not dying in a huge level or using a certain weapon.
doesn't that change the way you would have played the game in the first place?
i mean would you do all those if you wouldn't earn a trophy?
if you play the game for a second time its ok but doing everything the first time you play a game i think it does affect the way you would have played it...
that was my point (and question) in the first place...;)

@ProblemSolver
i'm pretty sure you can disable the notification for the trophies from the options...
but it think it does disable the friends online/offline notification too... :frown:

[KGB]

Well I think they add a bit to games personally. I've gone after a few Plats, but I didn't think it would make me a social pariah. I think I got my money out of the games that I did get platinum. For instance I played Uncharted on normal mode before the patch for trophies came out and that was it, never played it again. But I must of played for hours on the second game. I do it for my own amusement not to show how great I am at a game.

Does it really matter anyway, It's like the pointless argument about online ranks on HD, people getting criticism for playing a game too much, 'how dare they get to level 100!!!' I think people who have a problem with trophy hunters are slightly snobbish in an inverted way.

[ProblemSolver]

@RedScar: xD


I disagree with that, it doesn't make the game look cheap at all. ...
Never said that. ;)



How do they distract from a game? I fail to understand that.
When ever I got a trophy I just followed a path someone has layout out for me
ahead of time, given me the feeling that I've not followed my own path / way
of doing things. That's just distracting, for me. Its like if someone is just
waiting for you to arrive.

Luckily Heavy Rain awarded the trophies after each chapter and not during
gameplay. They did that for a reason.

[ACE-FLO]

Sony included Trophy support for games in an update because they beleived it to enhance the gaming experience. Some of us are more competitive than others. Others have more of a passion for a game than others. Others just like to trophy hunt. And there are others still who.... Please make me stop! :D

@DreamyElf, I see your point, but here's the deal. If said game had a trophy for completing the storymode in less than 5hrs, by all means they should go get it - but not before they complete the game normally - otherwise they'd just be missing out on a lot of content, and think the game is done with... bastardising the purpose of the game.

However, how someone plays their game which they bought with their own money, is not for me to say - or anyone else for that matter :g If they wanna trophy hunt, fine. If they wanna complete every aspect of the game including the trophies, even better... and if they wanna take the game online with their trophies giving them confidence - then come, bring it :D

EDIT: @ProblemSolver :+ you didn't, sorry :paperbag. Re-reading your post, I see you wrote that it was a "cheap way of making the game more interesting"... But the games don't advertise their trophies... it's not a selling point. Is it? It's something discovered once the game is bought...

[amplificated]

I have mixed feelings about trophies. Most usually suck. But it does feel good to get that popup. Most decent challenges in games, well this was the case years ago in the PS1/2 days, gave you a reward. These days you're just given a gold trophy as your reward, which kinda blows. I liked the idea of meeting requirements to unlock special stuff in games, as long as it wasn't overly ridiculous to achieve: rather, setting you on the right path for making you better at the game. As time goes on, it seems devs want to hand everything to you as soon as possible rather than demand a LITTLE something from the player.

I have fond memories of attempting to speedrun Resident Evil 2 back on the original version that didn't just hand you all the special gamemodes after a single completion of one of the stories. When you had to complete the overall game in under 3 hours 3 times in a row in alternating stories with an A rank, etc. My best time in Leon A was about 1 hour 35 minutes. I was fairly pleased with that, and it still didn't even unlock anything on its own. Since I had a pirated copy back in the day, I decided to buy it off the US PSN and have a go, and it just wasn't the same with this version. I slowly made my way through the game making sure to read all the notes and **** since it'd been a while, finished in like 4-5 hours or whatever, and still unlocked just about everything in the game basically on that one run. Eh, not much to do with trophies directly there, but you kinda see that trophies developed from this idea that there's nothing left to unlock, just a pseudo-award for doing what's usually a generic task. Most games these days have a lot less unlockable content.

Most trophies feel like a cheap substitute for a reward. Some, like beating Zico, can be a reward in themselves, but they're rare.

[Hellfire_WZ]

I don't mind trophies if it feels like you're progressing into the game as you unlock them. Bayonetta had a ridiculously long trophy list, and while some of them were to do with game progression, there were a number that just seemed to be there for the sake of it. The way I see it is this. Things like:

Beating the game on hard difficulty - fine.

Successfully completing a minigame without health loss - no problem, nice little challenge that still feels like part of the game.

Killing 100 enemies in 60 seconds on the 17th June using a squeaky hammer while standing on your head with a French horn stuck up your arse playing I've Got A Lovely Bunch Of Coconuts - no thanks.

[ProblemSolver]

@ACE-FLO: Even if they, the trophies, aren't advertised on the box, they are
used to gain interest. Look at the discussion about the Fury trophies back
then. Trophies are also the second thing known before release. And there are
many people reading those up and get influenced by it -- good or bad. What I
don't like about trophies either are the way people speak about a game. Often
it focuses around how to get a certain trophy and similar things. Anyway,
that's just my opinion.

I do believe that there is a way for trophies, but not the way we know it.
Trophies, or whatever we call it, should be tightly embedded into a game
without any external influences. And if one really needs a certificate, for
a CV or whatever, of his / her achievement, then the game could generate a
final image (possibly a very unique one) with all of your stats and whatnot
after having beaten the game, which can be saved on disc.
Did anyone remember the final screen of MGS4 (the emblems)? Ah, and just
guess why Konami didn't updated MGS4 for trophies.

Here is another thing; what if I want to create a game that shouldn't have
any trophies at all, because they aren't of any use for the game? Up to my
knowledge every PS3 retail and PSN game (excluding PS2 and Minis) must
include trophies (since about one or two years). Why? If I create a game that
should deliver a certain experience where trophies aren't needed, then why
should I include trophies just for the sake of it? Easy. Because people do
play / buy games for trophies. So there is a business model behind all of
this. Money-wise it may fit quite well, no problem, but I can't see how PSN
trophies do serve gaming on a broader scale -- justifying their existence.

[mdhay]

Trophies are the most pointless thing to ever exist on a console. They only serve to show that someone has wasted so much time of their life to unlock a s****y graphic that will not help them at any point in their lives whatsoever. It pisses me off more when M$ acted like they invented them even though it was Insomniac that did with Ratchet & Clank 1. On the PS2. :rolleyes:

[ACE-FLO]

.. but I can't see how PSN trophies do serve gaming on a broader scale -- justifying their existence.

I think they are there to serve Gamers, rather than gaming in general. Do trophies subtract from a game? Not really, if you can still play the game without trophies hindering your experience while playing. Having the pop up appear doesn't count as a pop up also appears when a PSN friend comes online. It's not like we get a "pause" in the middle of the game, and a message telling us "You require X trophy to proceed" LOL

Trophies, have in turn, served to make the gaming universe even larger. Let me justify that. Earlier in this thread, peeps have mentioned that some gamers, play a game only to complete the trophies (boring imo). They obviously go through games like I go through my day... fast! So, these trophy hunters are buying games more often than those of us who don't trophy hunt - it's a given. Their need to flash their e-willy to their friends about how bad ass a gamer he/she is is a competition in itself - who has the most games platinumed? LOL - So these kids are buying games left right and centre, putting money into the pockets of developers - who in turn can churn out out better fames with bigger budgets...

To my understanding, that's what we all want isn't it? More games, gaming genres, etc to choose from...

Sony, as much as I love and hate them simultaneously, have earnt my respect - if begrudgingly. They think out of the box - giving us 3D gaming this year, and other new peripherals which will only serve to enhance our gaming experience. The same way the trophies in games are serving to enhance the experience of games for trophy hunters. That's how I feel about it all :)

[OBH]

I dont mind throphies, to me its just a bit of personal fun. Its the xbox 360 gamer score that REALLY winds me up, cant believe people people actually think that that little number represents how good you are at everything :bomb Such a joke. Completing all campaigns on expert on left for dead 2 earns you 50 points, yet completing the tutorial on avatar gives you 1000?? :eek

[blackwiggle]

I don't mind trophies, they are not the reason I buy a game though.
I'll try and get all the trophies if I can, unless the need achievement to unlock a trophy is ridiculously mundane like those found in the majority of FPS.
I mean they are there, why not, doesn't hurt.

I'm not a fan of the multiple play through to get Platinum unless it's a really short game, like the first Uncharted that need easy, normal, hard & crushing... I mean really, I just couldn't be bothered.
Online trophies can be frustrating at best and unattainable at worse, if you get a game after all the initial fuss has died down and few people are playing it, the same thing goes if a cheat becomes common usage among those in the know but wreaks any chance of somebody new to the game getting a particular trophy, there's one on Motostorm Pacific Rift that suffers this apparently.

Trophies give you something too aim for, since as somebody else pointed out, unlockable portions of a game after a achievement seems to be a thing of the past.

I look at friends trophies, and I guess they look at mine, no harm in it.
I've got around 15-20 people on my friends list that have over 100 games listed, most of these people have only got around the 25% completed on the majority of their games.
Not what you could call trophy junkies.
Although one is on level 20 I think.....;)

[KGB]

Are you reading this DP, what do you think? :)

[Dark_Phantom_89]

Haha, I was wondering if someone was going to mention me :paperbag

Personally, I think that trophies add more replay value to a game and allow you to explore things that you wouldn't normally. However, I voted for "it depends on the game," as I do agree that some trophies are just plain ridiculous and are far too specific.

[AppleJack]

I actually kinda like trophies. They can add more replay value to a game and can illustrate your progress in a game depending on how they are implemented. They can encourage a play to try out different aspects of the game they may not have otherwise.

I have both a PS3 and a 360, and I do like getting achievements on the 360 as well as getting PS3 trophies. However, I don't usually get games just to get the achievements/trophies. That being said, two exceptions are Bioshock 1 and Borderlands (both are awesome games I love playing). Borderlands is the only 360 game I've gotten all the achievements including the DLC, and on the PS3 Borderlands happens to be the game I have my only platinum on (I will eventually get the DLC trophies and 100% Borderlands on the PS3 as well). I'll try to get as many achievements/trophies as I can on a given game, but I don't usually go for every single one

On the 360 side, a prime example of improperly-implemented achievements is a little game called Avatar: The Burning Earth. This is a game one can get all the achievements (and the 1000 gamerscore) in about 5 minutes. But I've heard it's a junk game and I refuse to play it.

HD on the other hand, they got it right (even though I think Zico's a masochist for making us clear Anulpha in 30.82 seconds with the Piranha :) ). The trophies in HD illustrate your progress, encourages you to try out the different aspects of the game, and has some tougher ones for the very skilled players (yea, I'm talkin' about you again Zico :) )

I will say that thus far the achievement/trophy I'm most proud of in all my games on both systems is Zone Zeus. Zico will be right up there if I ever manage to get that one.

Take Care

[Harvai]

Completing all campaigns on expert on left for dead 2 earns you 50 points, yet completing the tutorial on avatar gives you 1000?? :eek

This is what I love and hate about Gamerscore. Some games give you stacks of points for basically playing and finishing the game, whereas others make you bust your balls just to get a few measly 10/20 point ones.

I've got a mate who's a bit of an achievement hunter; he'll go out of his way to get as many points as he possibly can, often trying to rope me into busting my arse playing a game on the hardest difficulty just to net a few points.
Pfft, I recently bought Bad Company 2 and got about 500 points for finishing the campaign. On normal.

I personally don't think gamerscore/trophies ruin the gaming experience. it's not like you need a certain amount of each to progress through the game, and if people brag about what they have, it just goes in one ear and passes out the other.

...except of course online-only achievements, especially if you buy a game that's been out for a while and it's hard to find a game. Or, you buy a fairly recent one but playing online is like pulling hairs (I'm looking at you, BC2. "Oh, you're from Australia? HOPE U LIEK LAG LOLOL")

[Koleax]

Another reason someone might want to have to all the trophies/achievements for a game is because they are completionists. They want to "finish" a game and experience everything there is to experience about it. When a developer puts down requirements for a trophy, essentially they're telling the player, "here, this is worth doing, if you want to have fun and do interesting things with my game." It's the same reason people who read Moby Dick might want to read the unabridged version or a classical music fan will listen to an entire symphony instead of just the popular selections.

At least the concept of a "trophy" is slightly more dignified than "achievement," sparing one the pretense that they are doing something difficult. You're sitting on your ass playing a video game. Anybody can do that and you're not achieving anything.

Acknowledgement of success in a particular game is still in its infancy. There's no reason why the high scores for games on XBL can't automatically update to a public server, where you can view them on a website. Journalists and fans should be able to track good players, follow their progress. The big console developers haven't quite figured that out yet, thinking that social networking means a friend's list and Facebook integration.

[UB3R~JKP]

I love trophies! Seeing things being rewarded by something means a lot to a certain kind of gamer! Sure there are people who play games just for trophies but that does not give anyone the right to ridicule them...after all it's up to you how you enjoy the game. Many people would decide that WipEout's online play is way too elitest and the core gameplay is not good enough to hold their interest, so they may play just for trophies/campaign that's perfectly fine in my book. Plus I give huge props to people who Platinum games more than anythingelse after all if they ain't a trophy hunter (which is blatently obvious to the eye) it shows just how MUCH they love their games for me the games I platinum'd are as follows:
-Pure:100% Platinum
-Vancouver 2010 100% Platinum
-NHL 3-ON-3 100% No platinum
And games I am close to Platinuming:
-GTi Club Cote D'Azur 84%


Platinums mean a lot IMHO in regards to just how much you love that certain game, I earn trophies solely for MY purposes and really don't give a crap about a little number that appears beside my name!

[KIGO1987]

Just voted then, i know what i choose.

It does affect your game interests in a way. Just look at the Zico trophy.

[blackwiggle]

That sums up the whole discussion right there.

When you go look at you wipeout trophy list would you rather see the little picture of Zico or a blacked out, unattained trophy?

Missing one trophy in a game can be nigglingly irritating.
Like when you go out and finding that you have managed to get one very tiny but noticeable food spot on the front of your shirt, it just bugs you because it ruins the look and you can't cover it up.

There is a good point to having trophies that nobody has mentioned.

That is that once you have attained all the trophies, you know you have defiantly finished games that have no real replay value, then you're safe to sell them on or use them to trade in for another game.
You can usually pick which games are likely to get added packs and more trophies, so you might hang on to those, but they aren't that many.

I've got two irritating little trophies to clean up to platinum this last game I've been playing, I just want to finish it, then it's collateral for another game.

Like FFXIII, after playing it solidly for 60+ hours then having my console die and having to start all over again, this time I mapped out a plan of attack, so the last enemy I had to kill gave me 2 silver, 2 gold and the platinum trophies all at once.
That's it, game over, never to be played again, thanks Square Enix for a disappointing FF I'll use it to trade in.

[Woopzilla]

Trophies are there to please those who want them. It reminds me back when BF2 came out and they had medals that show different acheievements like kills or time with a certain kit. People used to stat pad just to get them and ruin the fun for the rest of the server they were in. That is about the only thing I dislike about them is how ppl pad or farm just to get them. Outside that though I really don't care about them, the WOHD ones were cool because they are challenging but I've never really tried for them in any other game.

Trophies themselves don't ruin the game, but the community and how they go about getting and using ("my e-penis is bigger") the trophies does.

PS: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qlxZKUWXxiU for lols

BF2... ahh, good old BF2. I spent like 500 hours total on that game. My stats: http://bf2s.com/player/67373141/

It really did ruin this game somewhat... you'd get 'stat padders'. Three friends crawl off into one corner of the map, one guy is a medic, one is an enemy soldier and another is just there to be killed. Enemy kills guy -> medic revives -> enemy kills guy -> medic revives -> enemy kills guy -> medic revives -> etc... = points points points points.

Then you'd get maps like karkand... oh wow, 64 man on that server. US doesn't even bother going for caps since they are all just medics and lieuts handing out health/ammo to the people endlessly throwing grenades. It's quite something to behold seeing 64 grenades being thrown per second.

Basically, trophies/awards that don't need grinding and don't derail online gaming are a-ok.

*Remembers commanders wasting one of the team's tanks/helicopter/jet sitting in them and commanding to accumulate time for both... or people going afk for that one 6000 hour badge (lol (and there were 6 of them for exta lulz)) that one eventually got patched down in requirement though.

[DreamyElf]

There is a good point to having trophies that nobody has mentioned.

That is that once you have attained all the trophies, you know you have defiantly finished games that have no real replay value, then you're safe to sell them on or use them to trade in for another game.
You can usually pick which games are likely to get added packs and more trophies, so you might hang on to those, but they aren't that many.

good point mate:+
but i'll say again it depends on the game and how YOU play the games!
so after you got all trophies or platinum on wipEout did you sold (impossible with digital copies but let's assume you have a blue-ray copy) the game?
no.
i got the platinum on ffxiii, what now i'm supposed to sell my copy?
no.
i'll play the game again in the future.this is how i play my action adv/rpg games.
i finish them and i play them after some months again and after that the same.
if you didn't like f.e. ffxiii in the first place you should have sold the game after( or even before) you got all the trophies imo. :)
why play a game if you don't like it anyway?
and why stop playing a game you like after getting all trophies?
trophies can add replayability but getting them all doesn't mean that you should stop playing the game and sell it.
just my opinion here, i'm not judging you mate! :)
you are free to do(and play) whatever you like with YOUR games!;)

[AG-wolf]

I never had any real concern about trophies (or rather "achievements," since I do most of my current gaming on The Other Machine)... but I did find it really amusing and sad when I was in a game lobby one day and some dude was boasting about his gamer-score and all the achievements he gets, and the fact that he "completes" games 100% and gets every single achievement because "that's what they're there for."

Nobody I personally know is obsessed with them... my friends and myself have always considered them just added objectives on top of the normal games- some you can get with little effort, some are ridiculously hard. It's fun to compare your own in a game with some of your friends and see if there's any sort of challenges you guys can do back and forth...

beyond that, though, they're pretty insignificant in my eyes. Some people just get way too caught up in achievement-whoring and it seems like they don't actually play the game for the game itself. *shrug*

[ProblemSolver]

Don't know if any of you know Chris Hecker, but he was one of the guys back
in the mid-nineties doing some basic graphics work, writing articles and stuff,
for 3d graphics engines. He is pretty well known in the gamedev scene. Anyway.
I was a lil surprised "seeing" him given a talk at GDC 2010 about 'Are
Achievements Harmful?'. I haven't found any transcripts but here is a summary
of someone who was there;



GDC 2010: Are Achievements Harmful?

In my last session Thursday, Chris Hecker energetically explored the current state of knowledge about the psychological effects of achievement-type reward structures. He opened the talk with a plea to the academic community to do more work in this field, because the research is spotty at best and there’s a severe lack of consensus. Hecker kept coming back to that lack of consenus throughout the talk, insisting to the audience that despite his personal opinions on the subject, the research doesn’t currently lead to a specific conclusion.

He cited works by B.F. Skinner and Alfie Kohn, both of whom have written about the adverse effects of particular reward structures on motivation. Kohn in particular has railed against “pop behaviorism”, which put simply is the idea of “do this, and you’ll get that“.

Hecker drew a distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Intrinsic motivation comes from within: a desire to do a thing for the sake of the thing itself (Csikszentmihalyi terms this an “autotelic” task). Extrinsic motivation comes from without: a desire to do a thing for the sake of an expected, associated reward — like an achievement!

Hecker’s thesis was that “the research shows that in most cases, extrinsic motivators are ineffective and actually decrease intrinsic motivation on interesting tasks.” He noted that intrinsic motivation appears to be superior to extrinsic motivation with respect to creativity, problem solving, quality and speed of work, and overall happiness.

He referenced a study where two groups of kindergarteners were told to draw a picture. One group was told they’d be rewarded with candy (and indeed, this occurred), while the other group was promised (and received) no reward. The next day the experiment was repeated. The group that had been rewarded the day before didn’t draw anything the second day, but the other group did.

He cited another study in which Pizza Hut gave school children a free pizza for each book they read. When the pizzas stopped coming, the kids stopped reading. Hecker argued that what should have happened is the kids should’ve been given a book for each pizza they ate.

He then spent some time discussing various classifications of rewards: tangible vs. verbal, expected vs. unexpected. He discussed “contingent” rewards: those that require engagement in or completion of a task. The vast majority of rewards in games are contingent on something.

He reminded the audience that the few bits of research in this field are still incomplete, and still in conflict. But there are two points, he says, that psychologists appear to generally agree on. First, that “for interesting tasks, tangible, expected, contingent rewards reduce free-choice intrinsic motivation”. Second, that “for interesting tasks, verbal, unexpected, informational feedback increases free-choice and self-reported intrinsic motivation”. Even just these two results, he says, are “huge”.

It’s worth distilling that a bit. Basically, the research appears to show that if you hand out achievements (an example of “tangible, expected, contingent rewards”) for in-game behaviors, players will soon stop engaging in those behaviors unless you continue handing out achievements. Conversely, if you simply acknowledge player behaviors in a non-contingent way (“verbal, unexpected, informational feedback”) players may actually become more interested in playing the game for it’s own sake, achievements be damned.

Hecker invoked Jesse Schell’s by-now-known-to-everybody DICE 2010 talk, and highlighted a response to that talk by Raph Koster: “We don’t have any issues with rewards that are even more tangible, like giving your kid money for a straight-A report card… as long as we are comfortable with who is setting up the reward and what criteria.” Hecker argued that the research suggests giving your kid money for a good report card — a tangible, expected, contingent reward — may actually make future report cards worse if you stop paying.

He highlighted another comment, this one by Mike Jackson of CVG UK: “It would be brilliant if you got, say, money credited to your PSN account for finishing games. You know, a real-life reward. That’d get you playing.” Hecker responded fiercely: “Why are we making games if we’re having to pay people to play them?!” The audience responded with uproarious applause.

Hecker insists, again, that while the current research appears to suggest that the comments he just highlighted are wrong, the evidence is not yet conclusive. He argues that we need to study this in more detail, to keep our medium healthy.

He concluded with two major points. First, that “the industry needs to start studying the long term impact of achievements on players.” He noted that Microsoft’s usability research group is in a fantastic position to do this, and laments that said research is, apparently, not being done. Second, that “developers need to be better versed in the literature and more thoughtful about the consequences of extrinsic motivators.”

While the talk was brilliant, energized, and provocative from start to finish, I think Hecker actually delivered his best line during the Q&A. Asked whether we should employ a reverse-psychology approach of awarding achievements for dull tasks that we don’t want players to perform, Hecker noted that this approach would likely still erode intrinsic motivation by definition and is thus undesirable. He then posed a question of his own: “Are we disincenting people from playing games just for the beauty of play?”

Thought-provoking material indeed.
[Ref (http://third-helix.com/blog/?p=908)]

[brainbeat]

trophy hunting is bad mmkay. Well its bloody expensive at least, I did 15 levels in the 1st yr and burned out almost quit gaming. The ylod had something to do with it i had about 10 platinums i was working on that i lost savedata 4 talking 300 hrs worth, now i just enjoy them and dont even attempt any, could of platinumed cod if i cba but do i wanna play again just to get intel, dont think so:)

[blackwiggle]

good point mate:+
but i'll say again it depends on the game and how YOU play the games!
so after you got all trophies or platinum on wipEout did you sold (impossible with digital copies but let's assume you have a blue-ray copy) the game?
no.
i got the platinum on ffxiii, what now i'm supposed to sell my copy?
no.
i'll play the game again in the future.this is how i play my action adv/rpg games.
i finish them and i play them after some months again and after that the same.
if you didn't like f.e. ffxiii in the first place you should have sold the game after( or even before) you got all the trophies imo. :)
why play a game if you don't like it anyway?
and why stop playing a game you like after getting all trophies?
trophies can add replayability but getting them all doesn't mean that you should stop playing the game and sell it.
just my opinion here, i'm not judging you mate! :)
you are free to do(and play) whatever you like with YOUR games!;)

I said sell on games with No Replay Value.
Wipeout, all of them, are all about replay value, the trophies in Wipeout are just an aside for those who are familiar/competent at playing Wipeout, but seem structured to get new players up to expert class if they achieve all of the trophies.
In other words, your not going to get them unless your pretty good at Wipeout.

As for FFXIII, the fact that I hadn't even finished story mode when my console died made me want to see if anything interesting did actually end up happening, so I started it again [using skip cut-scene a LOT] and I played it through in that hope, but found the answer no.
It wasn't that I didn't like it, more that it was a disappointment in that for a RPG there was very little variety in game play/challenges like previous FF's.

Problemsolver.
Interesting speech given there.
The problem of using the test that they did with the kids and Books/Pizza, Drawing/sweets reward thing is that there is one major difference between the gaming situation and those tests, which makes the comparison pretty useless.
That is that in a none test situation, the gamer has already chosen which game they want and has expended money to purchase it, so there is a both a want and a vested interest in completing it on those levels, regardless if any trophies are awarded, as this has been the situation well before trophies ever existed.
Unlike the kids situation, where it was more of a bribe to participate.
Take away the bribe, participation stops.

[DreamyElf]

I said sell on games with No Replay Value.

yes, your right, my fault didn't notice that...:redface:

ok forget wipeout.
that doesn't change the point of my whole previous post...
i mean sure FF13 was a little disappointing but i will play it for sure
in the future even if i got the platinum.
for me it has replayability, for others it hasn't.
sure it depends on the game but it also depends on how a player plays his games. :)
anyway i never sell my games so maybe that's why i see it that way...

i could go on forever with examples to support my thoughts but i'll stop here...
i doesn't like much to argue... :)

[KGB]

FF13 is a good example of incorporating trophies in a game well. All the trophies in it are part of the process of completing the game and levelling up and don't go off on some tangent. They are all things you would of done in any previous FF game if you were that way inclined. It's just a shame that the game itself is terrible :frown:

[ProblemSolver]

... the gamer has already chosen which game they want and has expended money to purchase it, so there is a both a want and a vested interest in completing it on those levels, regardless if any trophies are awarded ...
True. But whether you spent money or not, it doesn't say you won't get
influenced by the trophy system, which may possibly alter your experience
and gameplay.

Hecker pointed out what the problem is all about by saying; "... Basically,
the research appears to show that if you hand out achievements (an example of
“tangible, expected, contingent rewards”) for in-game behaviors, players will
soon stop engaging in those behaviors unless you continue handing out
achievements. Conversely, if you simply acknowledge player behaviors in a
non-contingent way (“verbal, unexpected, informational feedback”) players may
actually become more interested in playing the game for it’s own sake, ...".

Well, we have in-game achievements since ages, but this time around they are
abstracted out of the game and are even summarized into one single number.
That's pretty much useless. And there is even no virtual integration of
trophies in any other product, not even in Home. So what's the reason to have
them at all? Easy. To sell games, to sell even more games. Nothing more,
nothing less. Just look at the Fury trophies again. They are pretty much
ridiculous, aren't they? If I remember correctly, Paul pointed out that the
trophies for Fury were chosen to reach more customers.
What I want to say is the following; trophies are abused to make a game look
more interesting to increase sells. Quite interestingly, all the trophies of a
certain game are always known before the game is on retail. Hence, as a
possible customer you may also peak over the trophies and as such getting
more exposed to the game leading to a possible buy. From a business point
of view, no problem. But they should relabel trophies to something else
instead.

[blackwiggle]

Yeah the FURY trophies are pretty lame, as much as SL say they made those particular ones to reach more customers, I think it was as much to compensate for the difficulty of the HD ones, which if you look at the PS trophies website has HD rated in the top 5 for difficulty.
I've seen posts where people have said they are giving up playing HD because they can never see themselves being able to beat Zico , Zone Zeus or Elite Campaign Legend for example.

So in a way, in HD's situation, having the trophies have actually stopped people playing the game, basically because of a feeling of inadequacy and frustration in not being able to get the trophies.

If the trophies weren't there, would these people still be playing the game?

I still don't think trophies ruining the gaming experience in the vast majority of cases, but there are some ridiculously hard trophies that do.

[ProblemSolver]

... I still don't think trophies ruining the gaming experience in the vast majority of cases, ...
I guess nobody really thinks that trophies do ruin the experience. One
shouldn't take the heading literally.

The questions are; what do trophies bring to the table? How do they serve
gaming?

From my local community here in Germany, I can say as well that the difficulty
of the WOHD trophies have lead to a diminishing interest in the game. People
try do get a difficult trophy and get frustrated in the process leading them
to lose interest. Such difficult trophies like Beat Zico and Zone Zeus should
be packed into a 'quest' within the game. Elite Campaign is useless. People
try over-and-over again to win races on Elite.
The trophies for the 'campaign' are just an easy way out for having no
campaign at all. But what to do? Making the trophies easier can't be any
solution (Fury).
The only thing that works is by making the game more versatile. Gran Turismo's
driving missions and license tests, anyone? But there comes a problem with it;
you'll need more time and money to get there. So why spending all the money
when trophies are the easy way out?
Hey, nobody cares about the franchise like we and some of the developers do.
Nobody cares whether you have fun with the game 3 years after release. If the
time has come for a new Wipeout, Sony will make a new one. The gaming industry
just move too fast to give a f.uck about communities. But there are exceptions,
of course.

Well, I think that every player should come to known by himself whether
a game gets very difficult in the end or not. But if nine out of ten tell a
newcomer that a given game is very hard, then you will either end up not
buying the game or you will end up here saying the game is still too easy. :D

[stinkleroy]

I guess trophies are what you make of them but to me they mean absolutely nothing to be honest. If I win some whilst playing a game the way I want to, so be it, but I would never let them define the way I play and what I play for. I havent even attempted a platinum, in any game I've played for that very reason. For me they seem to take you off course and demand of you things that may actually be tedious..hell I havent even bothered with Transcending because it involved me playing modes of the game I don't enjoy. So I voted 'I don't care about trophies' ;)

[yeldar2097]

For me it depends really.

If the trophies are based on skill, the simplest example being 'Complete the game on XXXXXXXtra hard mode', then sure I'll give it a go. Of course there are others which just kinda 'happen as you progress' but I don't really see the point in those.

If it's something silly like "Rank up to the maximum level online (which takes 2000 hours)" or "Do something very particular at a very specific moment, something that you'd never think of doing because it's pointless, and if you miss the opportunity you have to start the game again to do it (Hidden Trophy to make things even worse -_-) " then I won't think twice about avoiding it.

They're more of a prompt to challenge myself than a prompt to doing ridiculous things that bare no relevance as far as skill is concerned.

Bling Brigade is a stupid trophy, and if it hadn't been WOHD, then I wouldn't have done it. Wipeout is the only exception to the rule :nod
I think there's a similar sort of trophy in Burnout Paradise --> cbf

[Woopzilla]

I think it's interesting to see how far people can go in their hunger for trophies. Just look at 'Auf Wiedersehen Petrovic' in GTA4. It's glitched and requires you to complete all requirements for the trophy in one online session. It requires you to play (and win) in every game mode on every track with every-- you get the picture. It takes like 10-16 hour or something.

I mean, just look at the first post of this thread: link (http://boardsus.playstation.com/t5/Grand-Theft-Auto-Series/Auf-Wiedersehen-Petrovic-GTA-IV-PS3-Trophy-Guide-In-Search-of/m-p/40416533)

It looks like they're planning an expedition to the centre of the earth with that sort of organisation required (it comes complete with printable checklist lol).

Other GTA trophies are also very much like 'get the highest rank', 'play all of this mode and win', 'play all modes and win within blah-minutes'. Terrible. And no fun.

[infoxicated]

This is a really interesting thread, Woopzilla - it's something I've thought about a lot in the past, myself.

Back when achievements were first on the XBox I couldn't see the point of them. This was mostly due to many of them being somewhat pointless - like one for performing a task that was pretty fundamental to the game, for example. I just thought the idea was stupid and the meta game within a game would detract from the point of the exercise as a whole.

In fact, I kind of liked it when they made a parody of that type of thing in The Simpsons game, which said "Achievement Unlocked!" when you pressed the start button to begin the game for the first time. :)

When the Trophies came out on the PS3 I was kind of intrigued by them, though. I actually restarted Burnout Paradise to try and get all of the low-hanging-fruit style ones, but in going through the grind of getting the easy ones I soon lost interest in the game.

Trophies for the likes of smashing through 100 billboards required nothing more than playing the game and looking out for billboards, but since I'd already smashed the 100 billboards in my play through before trophies were added, the slog of doing it all again to get the trophy ended up boring me senseless.

When it came to Fallout 3 I thought the trophies were really well done, though. They generally related to the quest at hand and to this day it remains the only game I've gotten the platinum trophy for.

So I think their worth ultimately depends on the implementation. You're still going to get a token bronze trophy for doing something trivial like performing a barrel roll, and those attained for "playing the game in easy mode with pilot assistance activated" I think serve no real purpose or sense of achievement.

But trophies awarded for completing a long and difficult challenge are like the cherry on the cake. There's the added bonus that looking at the trophy profile for someone who's sent you a friend request can help determine whether it's for real or just someone dicking around with a sub account. :)

[ProblemSolver]

... It looks like they're planning an expedition to the centre of the earth with that sort of organisation required (it comes complete with printable checklist lol).
I never saw something similar like this before. Holy sh!t. Man!

@infoxicated: A trophy for completing a game would be fine, right.


... There's the added bonus that looking at the trophy profile for someone who's sent you a friend request can help determine whether it's for real or just someone dicking around with a sub account. :)
Does also help to differentiate stat-boosters at times.

[KIGO1987]

If there is going to be two platinum trophy's in Gran Turismo 5 like has been suggested around, i can see some people, trophy junkies, just purchasing this game just for the trophy's, then selling it for something else, smart marketing tactics from Sony there. Should make a well dent in the sales target also for this title, and thats not including the true enthusiasts of the Gran Turismo series too.

How many total trophy's for this title should be interesting as well. Im guessing there is going to be one license in the game dedicated to the Nürburgring alone.

[Aeroracer]

i come from xbox 360 so i am used to achievments..
im a achievment whore in that respect..i always gotta get a 1000 points its not about how many total points i got its about how many 100% completions i got..

my opinion on them is that they are fun but the downside is they slow down your progress in the game.

with wipeout i spent all my time on the tropheys played the game till i got them.had enough of the game by the time i got them..and stopped playing for a few months..
if i had practiced what really counts instead of doin gthe tropheys i would have been a lot better perhaps..
but saying that i did enjoy doing it so i can only blame myself..

the real big negative i can say about achievments and tropheys is multiplayer reliant trophies...these tropheys and achievments are total pieces of crap..they annoy nearly every player..apart from a few from what i have heard and read.

some of the worst achievments i know of is GTA (beat a programmer of GTA in a deathmatch)

saints row 2 (play the game online on the release date..(shame only usa got the game on the relaese date no one else did)


edit @dreamy elf....lol i just see your first post..so ps3 players are called trophy w*****rs...thats funny..on xbox there called achievment whores..


@infoxicated...100% agree with your point on tropheys and sub accounts..i always check out players met trophey profiles to see if thery are fake accounts..problem is 50% of them are..you get a rank 3 player who does AP phantom in under 1.50 yet still hasnt got the 100 br trophey..kinda gives it away..

[Rapier Racer]

Personally don't care for trophies, I play my games how I want and if that happens to get me some random trophies then fair enough, I won't be going out my way to attain them though.

I also think buying a game that you dislike just for the trophies is.... I dunno get a life?

[Woopzilla]

Considering how big Gran Turismo games are and how rarely I get anywhere near 100% completion, I think 2 plats sounds about right. :D But yea, it's probably going to increase interest in it as it will no doubt have many of those low-hanging-fruit trophies that Infoxicated mentioned. It will give people those little boosts in 'trophy level' which I forgot even exist until reading this thread.


saints row 2 (play the game online on the release date..(shame only usa got the game on the relaese date no one else did)

Really? You'd think developers would want '100%' to be achievable or risk those trophy hunters walking away from the game early disgruntled.

About the GTA one: that ones viral, as they call it. If you kill a guy who killed a guy who killed a guy who [...] killed a programmer: you will get the trophy.

[Aeroracer]

I did not know gta was viral..

[KIGO1987]

Personally don't care for trophies, I play my games how I want and if that happens to get me some random trophies then fair enough, I won't be going out my way to attain them though.

I also think buying a game that you dislike just for the trophies is.... I dunno get a life?

haha, golden post :)

Need to frame that last line.

[Aeroracer]

on xbox perhaps on ps3 you get players who just rent out games for a few days and milk as many points out take em back reapeat to build up there game score..there crap at all games but have a high total game score..then you get the hackers who hack thier points i see this guy which had over 200000 points on xbox and apparently completed like 150 games in one day with a perfect 1000 points apiece.. like anyone would take it seriously or even care tbo..the funny thing is xbox hate hacker and cheats and when they get found out and they always seem too they get either banned or thier game card is edited to -10000000 points and their name is mr cheat from cheatville which is funny..

[DreamyElf]

@woopzilla
that gta link is interesting...
but i think the bling brigade thread in this forum is somewhat the same, 25% or more of the new members here register only to post in that thread and then after they get the trophy they never come back...

about GT, i'm with you woop as i never got all the gold medals on licenses. :+
it will be "fun" if PD adds a gold(?) trophy on getting all licenses with gold rating.
it will be SO hard! :twisted

@jasmin
yeah i suppose they stole the name from their xbox cousins... :lol

trophies are only an indicator for me when i want to see what games i have in common with my friends. nothing else.
if someone has trophies on a game about 25% or 100% it is the same to me.

i would prefer something like xfire from trophies any day.
xfire it's a program on pc that tells you how many hours you have played a game, plus you can take screenshots and videos!
now that is a program that adds something to your experience! ;)

[Woopzilla]

I remember Half Life 2 and it's episodes employing a rewards system (and many were pleasant surprises). It's cool how Steam collects this and other data and publishes interesting gaming habits.

There's a global list of which awards have been achieved the most and by how many.

*Goes off to find a link*

EDIT: http://steamcommunity.com/stats/HL2/achievements

I remember reading an interview with some interesting statistics being mentioned... though I doubt I can find that again.