PS3 Trophies

[miffy495]

Well, as they're here, I figured I may as well try and earn some of them. Of all the games that support Trophies, I have exactly one, so I booted up Super Stardust HD and gave it a shot, if only to show up my sister's boyfriend who'd been spending the past week and a bit trying to get the trophies. Well, success. I now have 48% of the game's trophies to his 16%. I got all this in one run through the game. One miraculous run, honestly. I suck at twin-stick shooters. Tonight though, I was an idiot savant, not taking a single hit until the final boss, not even knowing what button uses boost or bombs (Thus getting the bomb hoarder and don't use boost trophies) and racking up an insane multiplier and high score. I don't really know how that happened, but it did. All in all, I'd call it a successful night. Except of course, for one niggling detail:

PS3 games can have trophies that require you to spend more money.

What's that? Yup. Almost 1/3 of the trophies for Super Stardust HD require that you have bought at least one of the two $5 add-ons that the game has available. Now I'm aware that the 360 has extra achievements that you can get only through DLC, (Crackdown definitely has this. I'm not sure about other games...) but MS also requires that every game has its full 1000 achievement points available to you right out of the box, no extra money required (except possibly for internet access). The extra achievements are added on top of that 1000. I believe Crackdown has a possible 1250, 1000 from the game, 250 from DLC.

I don't have, nor do I intend to get, the DLC packs for SSHD. This means that the most I can ever get for this game's trophies is 70%. 12/17. I don't think I've ever gotten all of the achievements for a game on 360, eight-hundred something on Crackdown was the highest I've gotten. Maybe GHII was close too. But I could. In the grand scheme of things, this is minor. Quibbling over a small .gif that means nothing except that I can shoot some pixels pretty well. But something just feels insidious about having these extra pats on the head for doing well at a game, but then withholding them until you spend another $5. Boo, Sony. Hopefully Stardust, as its DLC was available before the trophies were added, is an exception to the standard.

[elmuerte]

what's the whole use of these trophies, game points, achievements?

[toblix]

They're fucking awesome.

[twmac]

They bare the same value as highscores, it is all about the bragging rights.

I've reached about 19000 achievement points on my profile and some of them are pure dross (how I wish I could take back the time spent on Gun). But the 'Last 60 seconds without firing a shot' on Geometry wars and 'Complete King difficulty' on Conan are quite special to me.

If you get hooked on achievements they often give the game some replayability too, as long as the game's achievements are well thought out. Other games help you strive to do better, the ones in Virtua Tennis 3 are excellent as they encourage you to try out different shots and new tactics.

There are those that are lazy (Enchanted Arms) and those that actually spoiled the game for me a little (Oblivion, Eternal Sonata) then there are those that are just retarded (Gears of War and it's 10000 kills online, most of the Blacksite ones)...

Of course the achievements can only do that if you want to unlock them.

[Scrobbs]

I think I got the most points on any game from Splinter Cell: Double Agent - 650. I wanted more, so I started to play through on hard...and jesus christ. the enemies have sight like cheetahs, hearing like bats and reactions as fast as Asimov's finest. I barely made it through the first set of missions before having to pack it in - or break something.

[miffy495]

For me, achievements are not something I really give a crap about. If I'm playing a game and have looked through the list, I may take a bit more time because it usually highlights something the developer is proud of, but really I don't bother myself with them. That said, there are some games that have used achievements very well. Usually the open-world ones, actually.

I keep mentioning Crackdown in this thread, but that's mostly because that was the only game I've really gone for the achievements in. After 2 years, my gamerscore is at 9207 (just checked) and I'm not really bothered to get it much higher. It increases organically as I play through games, but never through a grind. Crackdown did it so well though. The main game having not much to do other than kill a bunch of people with no real story, the game actually arose out of the achievements for me. And it became so fun. The only ones I didn't really try for were the "Get all 500 agility orbs" and "get all 300 hidden orbs" ones, and even then I came close to getting them while going for all the others (497 agility. GRAH!) It has a screen with all of the achievements with little progress bars indicating how close you are to getting them, and nearly every achievement was focused on a different and very rewarding aspect of the gameplay that wouldn't have been revealed to the player if they were just playing through the main "kill these guys" campaign. If every game did their achievements like Crackdown, I would be a complete achievement whore.

Then we have games like Earth Defense Force 2017. Fantastic game, but the achievements are these. "Beat game on easy," "Beat game on medium," "Beat game on hard," "Beat game on intense (hardcore, expert, whatever it's called)," "Collect all weapons." Not exactly inspired.

As for PS3 trophies, only a few games currently have them available. I already had one of them, and mostly wanted to irritate my sister's boyfriend by getting more trophies than him in one sitting. Mission accomplished.

[Tanukitsune]

I don't know why Sony didn't use achievements, isn't Blizzard and Steam using achievements? So why not Sony? Do they think M$ will sue them or what?

I kinda like achievements, since they do make me go the extra mile, I at least try to get a few more collectables or try things I usually wouldn't but I only go wild and try to get everything when I simply love the game...

I heard some are refusing to play their PS3 games until they know whether they get trophies or not on them?

To think there are people with a PS3 and MGS4 NOT PLAYING IT because they want a trophy... That's just disturbing!

[Ben]

I don't know why Sony didn't use achievements, isn't Blizzard and Steam using achievements? So why not Sony? Do they think M$ will sue them or what?

What on earth are you talking about? Sony are using an achievement system: you perform specific tasks in the game and are rewarded for your accomplishment with a Trophy; in the same way you would unlock an achievement on 360. They are simply called "Trophies" to differentiate. This video explains exactly what trophies are and do.

PS - Outside of the GameFAQ and IGN forum communities I'm pretty sure people have stopped using the $ symbol when writing MS. This happened around 2003, maybe 2004, i'm not sure... Wikipedia may know.

[Tanukitsune]

What on earth are you talking about? Sony are using an achievement system: you perform specific tasks in the game and are rewarded with a Trophy; in the same way you would unlock an achievement on 360. They are simply called "Trophies" to differentiate.

PS - Outside of the GameFAQ and IGN forum communities I'm pretty sure people stopped using the $ symbol when writing MS. This happened around 2003, maybe 2004, i'm not sure... Wikipedia may know.

I should have said "using achievements as a name" I guess? I know it's almost the same thing as the 360 achievements system.

I could swear I see "M$" used semi-regularly? And I don't even frequent those forums!

[Ben]

Hehe, well then isn't it obvious why they would want to differentiate by name? I mean, it's the same reason MS don't call their "Avatar's" Mii's. Competitors don't want to be seen to be copying from each other, even when it's obvious they are... in all but name.

[Tanukitsune]

Hehe, well then isn't it obvious why they would want to differentiate by name? I mean, it's the same reason MS don't call their "Avatar's" Mii's. Competitors don't want to be seen to be copying from each other, even when it's obvious they are... in all but name.

Yes... but I wonder why Blizzard isn't changing the name? I can understand Steam since the games with achievements on PC are also on 360, but Blizzard?

[Ben]

...

Because Blizzard is not a competitor in the hardware market is it. It makes no difference to them or to MS if they call it the same thing. Whereas if Sony or Nintendo had a feature called "Achievements" it would obviously be negative from their point of view.

[Tanukitsune]

...

Because Blizzard is not a competitor in the hardware market is it.

So... if EA or Ubisoft did the same thing it would be O.K. just because they don't make consoles? I know they aren't competitors, but they are all part of the same industry, right?

Although I get what you mean, a part of me still finds it odd...

[Cigol]

It would have been better to have called them what they are; achievements. Everyone knows they are 'copying' Microsoft on this one, so calling them something different won't disassociate them - in fact if anything it provides a vehicle for calling into question their obvious copycat attempt.

Trophies are always going to stand out now, and for me they don't 'feel' right. Why am I getting a trophy? It doesn't make any sense. The numbers don't add up either - assuming every game from now on implements them I'm going to need one big mother of a trophy cabinet. Surely we should be getting medals like in Uncharted, and perhaps leave trophies for those truly memorable achie...trophiments (?)

Still, I'm not big on the idea of achiements, or trophies. I do like statistics however. Why does the PS3 not have a player profile and statistics. That's the interesting shit.

EDIT; The Uncharted PS3 trophies patch is out in PAL territories. A nice incentive to play it again I think and bound to boost platinum sales.