I love some of the justifications people come up with for this, particularly the people who are trying to define what's fun and what isn't. Because what's fun for some people is fun for everyone else, right?

Also, why would an achievement system prevent unlockables? I must've imagined the numerous 360 games I've played that also have unlockables. They aren't mutually exclusive, so let's stop pretending like they are.

Why is everyone acting like gaming companies are holding guns to the players head where they absolutely have to get every achievement in a game? If an achievement is lame, don't do it. If you don't like achievements, turn notifications off and ignore them. But instead, we sit here and have some people get all preachy and try to dictate to everyone what fun is and that nobody could ever have any fun collecting them or focusing on them in any capacity. Give me a break.

I mentioned this in another thread, but what bugs me about acheivements are the ones which ruin the endings of games, akin to those in Bioshock. I think that's what he's getting at

the only reason I like achievement, is because the first game I played on 360 had challenges for them like "don't get hit for 60 seconds without shooting".... which in itself is dumb, but actually forces you to play in a way you normaly wouldn't... in itself adding content to the game with a single sentence and an achievement at the end.

Nint should just have added achievements and made their game be only giving rewards for completing the levels (completed dungeon 1, completed castel 1.... no one's experience would be changed by this, but it would enable other devs to have them and nint fans who like them to be able to get a track of them.

QFT !!! I can't agree more. It's so funny that completing the game by itself is in most game, an achievment.

I remember when there was medals in the games, you fought for them, but not for getting bragging rights over the internet.

Achievements become a problem when that's the only reason to play a game. A couple of weeks ago i read somewhere that someone said that they would rather play a bad game with achievements than a great game without them. That is just wrong

I personally don't get achievements myself. They kind of remind me of a person praising their pet dog for fetching the ball, or in the case of achievements, fetching the ball 7,000 times.

Bragging rights? How often has a person gone online and said: "Wow! That guy got the achievement for fetching the ball 7,000 times! I am impressed!!!!"

It's bloody ridiculous!

had my 360 for about a month now and, honestly, i couldn't care less about achievements. seem kinda useless to me considering im not much of a completionist. i guess i really wouldn't care if ninty did/didnt make some sort of achievement thing.

I wonder if that was even an opinion or just a marketing guy planted in there.

This, adding achievements hurts nobody but adds enjoyment for many so Ninty's excuse is well not a good one.

I think that achievements would intimidate the expanded audience. Nintendo has a good reason to not add achievements.