We’ve heard the first bit of news that Gears of War 2 will feature Linked Achievements, or Achievements that give you something in one game based on something you did in another game. At first glance, this might sound like an amazingly awesome no-brainer idea. That’s where I come in… Chicken Little’s taken the day off and I’m here to fill in. This is the start of yet another rotation of the downward spiral that is Xbox 360 Achievements.
In the beginning… (heh heh, I’ve really always wanted to start a sentence that way… I guess I can check that off my list) Achievements were… wait for it… good. I think in concept they’re a sound idea and they can bring gameplay challenges to players that they probably would’ve missed. But Microsoft has given developers too loose of a leash on this and as a result, we’ve had such a wide span of Achievement implementations from ridiculous to worthless. Linked Achievements, in my opinion, are simply a marketing tool to give regular, repeat Xbox 360 game players a leg up compared to other more casual or system independent gamers. If you played Gears of War 1 to death, you’ll get more out of Gears of War 2. On the surface, there’s the immediate “What’s the big deal?” question, but it doesn’t take a stretch of the imagination to see where this is headed.
With Gears 2, you get unlockable players, with you’ll end up giving some sort of gameplay advantage to the very people who need it least… the ones who excelled in the previous edition of the game. I really see this as a slippery slope that takes only one misplaced foothold to end up at the bottom of a pit of Achievement despair.
I don’t want to feel like I have to play one game to get the same experience other people are out of another game and the moment a developer attaches something more than a player skin to one of these Linked Achievements is the moment I start saying “I told you so!” Microsoft, yes, you came up with Achievements first… you’ve driven them to the forefront of console gaming (on both your platform and their popularity has inspired a similar system on the PS3) but it’ll be a shame if your next move takes another step to undo your the credibility and usefulness of the very thing you’ve created.
I guess I’ll wait… pessimism and all…
![[Post to Twitter]](http://sarcasticgamer.com/wp/wp-content/plugins/tweet-this/tweet-this-small.png)
Tweet This
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
19 responses so far ↓
1 Eoco // Jul 29, 2008 at 2:12 pm
But what if the unlockable characters don’t give any advantage, other than looking different? That’s what Epic are doing, they are not giving players an advantage, but merely a meaningless skin on their character that shows that they’ve put effort into the previous game.
2 Shane86 // Jul 29, 2008 at 2:15 pm
Yeah Rothbart, they’re just skins they don’t give you any advantage, and the only reason they unlock them from playing gears one is those people died in gears one. People who played Gears 2 only wouldn’t even know who they are. I have 1170 gamerscore in Gears 1 so I’m expecting some cool stuff.
3 Saccia // Jul 29, 2008 at 2:17 pm
Okay Rothbart, developers have got to be saying WTF can we do with our games that people won’t bitch about. EA sold weapons and SG.com took them to the mat for that (then two specific guys bought it anyway :-P). Specifically people were up in arms about the idea of paying to get an advantage. Now, you bitch if people play and get an advantage. Ya know what? Someone can just go get GoW1 and play it if they don’t like it. By then it will be in the bargain bin. This is called rewarding loyalty. Game companies want to reward loyalty and if you bitch about paying for it then you can’t bitch if they allow people to play for it. It’s other free or it’s not. Rant out!
4 Eoco // Jul 29, 2008 at 2:20 pm
@Shane86
Exactly. The unlockable caracters that are revealed so far were killed in the first game. I don’t think they’ll be giving out extra maps or game modes either. Character skins and maybe some menu backgrounds or something.
5 Tweep. // Jul 29, 2008 at 3:13 pm
The only slippery sloope fallacy is how a new skin gives someone a gameplay advantage. How did we get to that assertion?
6 Yousty // Jul 29, 2008 at 3:25 pm
Looks like you need to go back and read the original story again, rothbart.
Based on all of the examples given by the developer, these should probably be called Linked Unlockables instead of Linked Achievements. They’re not giving you a more powerful weapon or even a more powerful character, you’ll just be getting characters from the original GoW that you can play as.
I actually think this is a brilliant idea. Reward players that played the heck out of your first game by automatically giving them cool characters in the sequel. I bet you wouldn’t be complaining if a sequel to Warhawk or R&C were doing this.
And to let you in on a little secret, GoW isn’t the first game to do this. EA used to do this with their sports games where it would detect how many EA titles you’ve previously played (based on your save files) and then automatically unlock some stuff for you.
Overall it’s just a genius idea to get people who haven’t played the first to go out and get it and beat it before the second one comes out. Heck, it will probably even cause some people who already own the first one to pop it back in and try and get some of those achievements they’re missing.
7 Kiltman67 // Jul 29, 2008 at 3:27 pm
Like everyone else has said, they’re just skins. I think linked achievements are a great idea as long as they don’t have have a significant effect on balancing.
I really hope that other developers start doing stuff like this with the Achievements and Trophys so that they become more than just a numerical pissing contest.
8 wjs416 // Jul 29, 2008 at 3:51 pm
This is a bit off topic but when get an achievement for real, it says Achievement unlocked with a lower case u, not upper case. Don’t hate Rothbart.
9 Sean "Rothbart" Workman // Jul 29, 2008 at 4:10 pm
Okay guys, clearly I stated that THE NEXT STEP is what’s going to be bad… so WHEN that happens, I’ll be here to say “Nya, nya, TOLD ya so!”
When I buy and play a game, I don’t want to feel slighted or read about what other people get (or get to do) that I don’t because I didn’t buy/play some other game.
If you’re all too naive to see how this is one or two steps from something very wrong, line up… it’s time for your shearing… Baaaaa!
10 Saccia // Jul 29, 2008 at 8:29 pm
You can shear me if you like Rothbart. Seriously, if they get to the “next step” I could care less. I would agree with the idea of giving out something great to players who played previous games. I would even say it might be an interesting idea. Gamer loyalty is great and that next step would be a way of saying thanks to those who are loyal to a game. Giving something to loyal fans does not mean they are screwing others. Do you scream that people should line up to be sheared when CVS gives someone else a $5 coupon who shops there all the time while you don’t get a coupon because you never shop there?
11 Tweep. // Jul 29, 2008 at 10:16 pm
I still remember when the psychic in the original MGS told me that I like to play Suikoden… Defnitely a logical slipperly slope… Bah!
12 Juvenileimp // Jul 29, 2008 at 11:36 pm
i agree rothbart i see where ur goin with this
13 TheMightyDisco // Jul 30, 2008 at 12:11 am
I see where he’s trying to go with this as well, but it’s pointless crying anyway.
Odds are, most people whom plan on buying gears 2 already played gears 1. Hence the reason on buying gears 2.
Unless it’s a noob who’s just buying gears 2 cause his friends are buying it…then you may insert sheep noise.
I think this is a cool idea, and it would be even cooler if they did give out a sick over powered weapon! Why shouldn’t they? If someone liked their game, and spent a ridiculous amount of time playing it, why can’t they reward that player?
Rothypoo, get off your microsoft hate box. Seriously. I’d be willing to be if Sony did something like this, you’d be the one bleeting praise.
Since you’ll be the one laughing when this goes horribly wrong, can I laugh when a PS3 game includes a similar feature?
14 Sean "Rothbart" Workman // Jul 30, 2008 at 12:28 am
TheMightyDisco: Nope, if Sony did it, I wouldn’t like it either… it may seem like simple “bias against Microsoft”, but it’s not
They’re losing the edge they once exclusively had with Achievements and as Sony’s trophies catch on, they’re going to try and experiment with new things which may sound all fine and dandy until you realize they’re going to get the xbots lapping up any ol’ idea they toss out if it means more even if it’s a detriment to gaming in general.
Mark my words, this effort to “expand/enhance/whatever” will likely have multiple negative steps along the way… I just have this feeling. Can you guys all sit there with a straight face and tell me you don’t think they’re likely to hose-up (their already questionable) Achievements/Gamerscore setup further?
15 Cody // Jul 30, 2008 at 6:38 am
I think even more interesting is the stuff they plan for Fable2-Im talkin about those mini games on XBL…what do you folks thinik about it? Is that cool stuff that might enhance the gaming experience or just another attempt to squeeze more money out of a full priced game?
16 Natas // Jul 30, 2008 at 9:02 am
Is Sony exerting ANY quality control over trophies? From what I understand, trophy allocation is left totally to the devs. Thus, a Sony-based Avatar will happen and, when it does, trophies will be just as meaningless as gamerscore. I have heard repeatedly from the non-achievement obsessed that they just don’t see the point in going after achievements if they don’t get anything out of it. Well, Epic is finally giving gamers something for the time and effort they put into a game with these linked achievements. As a die-hard Gears fan, I think it is an amazing idea.
17 Bill // Jul 30, 2008 at 11:28 am
Did you bump your head? How can a company rewarding repeat customers be bad?
The game industry has become very sequel driven, if you’re playing a game, it probably ends in a number at this point and it sucks that once you beat V1 of a game you ALWAYS start the sequel nothing because all your weapons & experience mysteriously vanishes between games. Why not reward the player who slogged through the previous version a something cool for putting in all that work?
A limited number of people in Halo 3 have Recon armor for a reason, & people that go to Vegas a lot get comp’ed more than someone showing up for the first time.
BTW, Sony did this years ago. In Ratchet & Clank 2 & 3 both gave you free weapons & skins if it found old save games on your memory card. It’s great that a company would want to reward a repeat customer.
18 codespace // Jul 30, 2008 at 12:28 pm
This is as close as we’re going to get to having some kind of individualized continuity from iteration to iteration within a franchise. Quit yer whining.
19 Mike // Jul 30, 2008 at 6:51 pm
None said nothing about need for speed? cant believe it, if it finds you have a previous instalation you get some money i believe. never heard anyone bitching about that.
Leave a Comment