How Many are Still Excited for the Switch?

[COKTOE]

bdbdbd said:

COKTOE said:

OR...the trophies are designed around the game? MUCH more plausible. It's actually quite visible. Insofar as it is breathtakingly obvious that games can still be played exactly as they would have been without achievments/trophies, and that said features add naught but an optional set of goals for the player to "achieve" or ...."troph". After that, it's about genetics. Environmental exposure. Tell me. How much did Uncharted 2 suffer as a result of trophies, in the wake of the trophy-less Uncharted? Did MGS4 suddenly get worse after it's trophy patch? I don't even know where to start with this one. It's difficult to get across in an internet post how wrong you are.

So, basically the trophy/achievement system is just based on how much time you're spending with the game, and this is what makes it flawed. I rather spend 30 minutes on a game full of action than 30 hours on a game where nothing really happens. You really can't say that the issue didn't relate to modern game design in general, though.

Time CAN play a role in the trophy/achievment system. Just like it can play a role in a game without them. Collecting all the bleep-bloops for example. Surely you've played a game where you've collected bleep-bloops. Have you ever heard of Donkey Kong 64? There are lots of bleep-bloops in that game. You don't need to get them. You can if you want to though. Time played is just one possible aspect of implementing the achievment/trophy system. It's up to the dev as to how it's implemented. And just like it was in games, waaaay before trophies, it's up to the player how much they want to wring out of a game. But again, and I can't stress this enough, games are not "designed around" achievments/trophies.