nvm i don't know exacly what i was thinking of. Think i was half asleep and misread the thread or something

What "conditions"? All I said was to name four; the rest was just describing some likely possibilities.

1) So apparently the Achievements gimmick hasn't been helping the replay value of your games after all.

2) Hardly. Achievements are there only to get you to blaze through the game, then abruptly provide you with the illusion that there is nothing left to do, so you should stop playing and go buy another game like a good little consumer. You ask what the incentive is to come back to, for example, DMC4. Only one incentive is needed: because it's fun (note that I cannot speak for DMC4 in particular, but this applies to all games). If it's a good game, not just fun to play but fun to play again, that's what replay value is. The rest is just gimmickry, smoke, and mirrors.

If that is all the incentive needed, then Achievements are not affecting it in any way.  If the game is still good and fun, people will keep it regardless of Achievements.  That is what you are basically saying.  Achievements help those of us, like myself, that play single player games once, beat it, then trade it in or sell it so I can buy a new game.  I have done this with every single player game I ever owned.  Achievements offer me further incentive to keep the game and play through on multiple difficulty levels, go for hidden items, etc.

Even before achievements, I would always try to play through a game as fast as I could without missing anything.  That way I could enjoy all the other great games that were all out around the same time.  I don't see why you hate Achievements so much, as you don't even own a 360 and therefore know nothing from first hand experience, and merely speak out of pure hate for any good idea the 360 had and the PS3 attempts to copy with Trophies.

But Achievements do affect replay, precisely by creating the illusion that you're "done" and that there's nothing more to do with the game. You say it yourself: you suck a game dry as fast as you can, then go snap up something new: exactly what the people behind Achievements want you to do.

Achievements were a brilliant gimmick, from a business standpoint. But they are killing the value of the games they infect, and worse, they're making people like you tolerate lesser-quality games by hiding the fact that the replay -where the game's true value comes to light- is gone.

You need to read more carfully.  I said I used to finish a game as fast as I could regardless.  I have a lot of social activities so when I get a chance to game, I go all out.  And, as stated, I said that Achievements actually make me play the game LONGER or multiple times.  I NEVER said it made me finish the game faster or get rid of it quicker.  You are clearly misinterpretting what everyone is saying.  How can achievements hurt a game, when most of the time the achievements take very long to complete and some games I don't complete all of them.  It adds WAY more replay value than without achievements.  What would make me replay a game on multiple difficulties and collect hidden items if I got nothing for it?

I'm sorry, but Achievements for the most part add replay value.  If you still don't see that, you need to open your eyes.  And since when do achievements cause me to play lesser-quality games?  I didn't realize reviews were based off of achievements.... I go by reviews and demos and rentals, so if the game sucks, I know before hand and don't buy it... there are no achievements in demos or reviews... rentals, yes, obviously.

You have nothing to back up your claims except the one flawed argument we've already explained to you.