| twesterm said: I'm not saying people finish more games because of achievements, I'm saying people play longer and differently. Pretend you're playing some sort of chapter based game and you're in the middle of chapter 6. On a normal Wii game, you're not getting achievements and for whatever reason you put the game down. What encourages you to come back? Enjoyment is a big thing but that's not always enough for people. If the Wii had given them some sort of over-arching achievement at the end of every chapter they know they're due at the end of chapter 6 even if it isn't the last chapter. That achievement may just drive the person to play the game that much further. Now pretend you're playing a game that has 40 collectibles. One game, lets say a Wii game again, gives you access to an art gallery for getting all 40. A similar 360 game with 40 collectibles may give you access to an art gallery after you collect all 40 and an achievement when you collect the 40th collectible. Finally, another similar PS3 title has 40 collectibles and it gives you access to an art gallery once you've collected them all and a trophy every five collectibles. Now pretend in all those games you're at 24/40 of the collectibles and you're about 2/3 through. For the Wii game, most people aren't going to care about the art gallery. For the 360 game, most people are going to give up finding the collectibles because they're surely missed the achievement and don't care about the art gallery. For the PS3 game, the person knows they're only 1 collectible away from a trophy and they're going to start exploring every corner seeing more of the game. Furthermore, they've tasted the carrot and they're going to continue to explore the game. They might not get all 40, they might only get 25 in the end but the achievements still served their purpose. That little trophy didn't sell anyone on the game at all but it made the person keep playing since they're only one away and it encouraged them to see more of the game that the Wii or 360 person would not have seen. |
Don't mistake me; I understand the logic behind the claim. But I'm fairly confident that the data don't support the claim. You're offering a hypothetical to support the thesis, and I concede that, in a vacuum, there is a logical connection there. But to the best of my knowledge, reality contradicts this hypothetical. Or is there some data that I'm missing?
