I'm in the minority I suppose, but I wish it were possible to disable Trophies... I find them intrusive and unnecessary - what happened to playing for the joy of playing, not to rack up an arbitrary number? It's all very Pavlov, and that makes me a sad doggy.

I'm actually the exact same way.  When looking at a multiplatform game, I usually choose in this order:

• Achievements-- if it's easy to get achievements, I'll probably get it for the 360, otherwise, not a big deal either way since all PS3 games now have trophies (before that, it was automatically 360).
• Online-- If I'm going to be doing something online, I'll choose 360 over PS3 since I have way more friends on Live.
• Random DLC-- If one game has a really cool DLC the other doesn't have (like Batman AA), I'll get that one.

Indeed.  But, given that they are pretty much the same thing, I just prefer the 'feel' of Achievements.  Not a slag on Trophies by any means.

ROFL! You gotta be kidding me. That has to be a glitch. *researches wikipedia* Oh wait no it isn't. No way. lol.

Anywho, back to central topic: Achievements do matter to me but I'm not a full-blown achievement whore nor do I care about winning a gamerscore contest. I just get some sort of positive reinforcement in my brain's reward center though when I see achievement unlocked. Sort of like how I feel when I see the level up notice. lol. But just like how I have a tolerance level of how much level grinding I can take, I have a tolerance level of how much achievement grinding I can take. I like to collect them if they aren't too much trouble for me (I particularly like grabbing all of the game's easy achievements whenever I can. lol) or if they're at least a fun grind. But if the achievement requires that I play through the game twice or three times and I just don't like the game enough to do so or if I gotta play the game again to get the achievement I missed, forget it. I'm not a completionist. If I have my fill, I have my fill.

I haven't yet bought a game yet specifically for the achievements though. Yeah I could get Avatar for the easy 1000G but I don't think it's worth it to buy a game that probably wouldn't be fun just for the gamerscore. Maybe worth a rental. lol. Apparenty the King Kong game is pretty easy for 1000G and it has a 80+ metascore so maybe I should give that a shot. lol. I know that games like Avatar get criticized for feeding you easy achievement but c'mon, can you blame the developers? lol. Easy achievements means more people rent and buy your games. Which means more money. Though IMO it would be smarter for developers to require more time investment to get the easy 1000. Because then you'd have to buy the game in order to get 1000G instead of just getting it within a typical weekly rental (unless you Gamefly of course). From Software had the right idea with Enchanted Arms' achievements. All you had to do was beat the game normally and you got 1000G. The Catch? Game was like 50 hours long.

really? you did?  i guess i'm the opposite.  i'm a trophy whore but i only what trophies that mean something to me.  i'm blanking on the name right now but there is a psn "game" (digital art so they call it) that i got all the trophies for but i didn't like the "game" and kind of wish i could delete those trophies so they don't stain my trophy collection.

I can believe this in a way

Linger in Shadows. I got all the trophies, too. It was pretty interesting, in a way, and the trophies aren't really an achievement, except that they show off the fact that you were willing to spend money on a movie where you occasionally shake the controller for cool effects.

Eh I disagree.  Numbers > Icons.

I have a score of 40,000 thousand.  You have a score of 20,000 I'm totally twice as better.

I've got a Square.  You have a triangle.  I have no clue how much better I am then you are.

I have 15 tropies, you have 8.

But they're all different kinds so I have to employ some sort of strange olympic grading scale to know how much better I am then you at something.

Not that i actually care about achivements.  But that's why points > Icons.

Hey Borderlands is going to kick ass.

RPG Shooter with somewhere between 3 and 17 MILLION guns with drop in drop out 4 player co-op.

You and your friends can all play together, trade guns and chances are outside of like start up and quest given guns... you aren't going to have ANYTHING the same.

Add in procedural generated dungeons, loot, monsters... and I mean.   You've got a game with near infinite replayability.

Just so long as they don't screw up the shooter mechanics.  (God I hope they don't.  Gearbox has a good record with that though.  I've already got the game bought on Steam.)

PC trumps achivements for me.  What with the better controls and PC exclusive features.

You can use trophy level for that. I am 7 and 43%, you are 6 and 12%. I am better.

Furthermore, say you have 5000 points.

And I have 5000 points.

Say a bronze is 10 points and a gold is 50

You could have 500 bronzes, and I could have 100 golds. You've just played more than me. You don't get the difficult trophies.

So the score is better for a quick comparison, but trophies are better at comparing actual "skill", if you can call it that.