Signposts Along the Way
This is part 4 of an ongoing series of conversations about dubious game achievements, trophies and rewards, with the hopes of unlocking some sort of meaning.
With special guest Michael "ahrezmendi" Stone!
Signposts Along the Way
Achievements that shadow a player's progress through the game proper -- usually a campaign or story mode -- represent the lion's share of Gamerscore or trophy allocation for most titles. They are usually superfluous, heaping praise on the player for doing nothing more than progressing through the game as intended. These kind of 'rewards' are often the focal point of critical attacks on the uselessness or redundancy of achievements in video games.
Level one completed? Here's a prize. Level two completed? Have another! Signpost achievements unlock like clockwork, popping at regular intervals as the player meanders down the breadcrumb trail.
Because the only way to miss one of these achievements is to stop playing the game altogether, they are rather ineffective as a motivational tool (unless, of course, a player is so trophy or achievement-crazed that they feel compelled to push through a game they dislike just for the profile prizes). However, signpost achievements can serve the following purposes:
- They track progress, allowing developers and friends to see the approximate point where the player got bored or super-enraged and traded the game in for $3 in store credit. Signposts achievements can also serve as a meta-roadmap if they aren't hidden, not only highlighting where the player has been but also how much further they have to go.
- They are easily implemented by developers, requiring little thought or creativity. From the player's perspective, they pad out the game's achievement or trophy yield, ensuring that a straightforward playthrough doesn't result in folks finishing with an unsatisfactory 50/1000 Gamerscore.
ahrezmendi's take: What I like about signpost achievements is they can serve as a spoiler alert. If I have one unlocked and my friend doesn't, that immediately tells me that he or she has not passed a certain point in the game and I can then avoid spoiling it for them.
What I dislike about signpost achievements is how they act as a metaphorical black mark on my Gamercard for the few games I never finished. They are a constant reminder that I haven't finished game X, and everyone I know gets to see it. Of course, the silver lining to this is that they also remind me of games I didn't enjoy, and why I didn't finish playing them. I see my 110/1000 in Lost Odyssey as a badge of honor -- I hated the game to the point that I couldn't even finish the story, and I don't care who knows it.
What's the Achievement?
Oblivion teaches new players some basic mechanics, implicates them in the brutal assassination of Patrick Stewart, and then spits them out into an intimidatingly large world with nothing more than the crappy gear they scrounged from the tutorial dungeon and the Escaped the Imperial Sewers achievement to get them started.
How Do I Do It?
How do you not?
How Hard Is It?
The only difficult part is looking at the massive map of Cyrodiil once you arrive in the game proper, and calculating just how much time this game plans to steal from you.
What Was I Thinking?
When the Escaped the Imperial Sewers achievement unlocked I was thinking something along the lines of, "Sweet Jesus, what personal hell have I purchased for myself?" From the sewer exit I spied plenty of sleepy hamlets and mystical stone towers and fierce crabs off in the distance, and I immediately wanted to explore and destroy them all.
With mixed feelings, I must admit that Oblivion's signpost achievements saved me from my own overwhelming completionism. They provided a framework of relative importance in a game where one can get lost for days in the woods, picking herbs and exploring incidental caverns. The achievements directed me to focus on prominent quest lines, such as the main story and the various guild undertakings. Because I decided very early on to use the game's achievements to narrow my scope of interest, Oblivion seemed more manageable somehow: I was able to overcome the niggling desire to complete every fetch quest in dozens of backwater villages. Sometimes it's nice to have a little direction.
ahrezmendi's take: In my case, these achievements further the fun of playing. They point me in the right direction, indicating how many steps in the main story arc I've completed, but this is rarely enough to keep me on point for very long. Unlike Clemenstation, these achievements weren't enough to save me from my desire to complete the things I had begun. However, they remind me how much I have yet to enjoy. Knowing that I'm only halfway through Oblivion tells me that there's much more to look forward to. Incidentally, I have completed all but two of the optional guild quests, while the main storyline sits at about 50% complete. The achievements remind me that I haven't yet finished it, but they aren't enough to keep me from enjoying the optional quests.
The Last Word
Oblivion's sprawling, non-linear gameplay offers a lot of possibility -- perhaps too much possibility for some -- and in this case, signpost achievements provide a useful extra-diagetic guidance system. Even more interesting is the effect of chasing signposts on one's constructed narrative: How, for example, am I going to justify my do-gooder Archmage Master's necessary descent into thievery and murder so I can finish the remaining guild questlines? Maybe something terrible will happen during her trip to the Shivering Isles...
When signpost achievements intersect with an element of player choice, they can be meaningful. But when they are employed as yet another incidental prize, unlocking alongside chapter complete screens and score summaries in games with linear paths, it's easy to see how players can write achievements and trophies off as needless positive reinforcement.
ahrezmendi's take: Signpost achievements help give direction in games that can be overwhelming, and they act as a virtual progress bar. However, in their role as a progress bar, they also tell you when your game may be nearing its end. I frequently find myself disappointed when I see the second-to-last story achievement pop, because then I know I'm almost done. In this respect, when used in a game with a linear story, I think signpost achievements are nearly spoilers in and of themselves, revealing to the player when to expect the climax. I appreciate having waypoints while building my own story, but I do not need them when the story is predetermined.
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer-friendly version
Delicious
Digg
Print
Those piddling little achievements that dot my score for doing things like beating the first level of Condemned get on my nerves to the point where I've actually considered logging myself out of Live whenever I play the first hour or so of a game.
That said, I actually tend to like signpost achievements in games I enjoy. They give me a sense of progression not unlike gaining a new level in an RPG, and they help me gauge not only how far I've gone in a game but also how far I have yet to go.
My Latest: Insufficient Resources and Hands in the Dark
Excellent commentary. I agree with ahrezmendi 100%. Signpost achievements in games like Uncharted and God of War are just retarded, and act as spoilers if they aren't hidden (which to be fair, they usually are these days). They should be outlawed.
The problem about Oblivion's signpost achievements is that they direct you toward the worst part of the game (after the fish-face issue).
Pyroman wrote:
Gravey wrote:
Google Profile
I expected to feel "meh" about achievements since I was a completionist in few games prior, but for some reason I look at my gamerscore as experience gained. I have roughly 400 more until 40,000, and all I can think is "I'm so close to leveling up!". As a result, if a game doesn't pad on some signpost achievements I feel a bit cheated, because my odds of maxing the gamerscore just decreased a bit.
I think one of the real purposes behind them is a lot of people like getting achievements, but also don't want to invest the time required to get really difficult ones. I know one true achievement addict I play with can't stand multiplayer achievements and thinks they shouldn't exist at all. He's not a competitive multiplayer sort of person so all it means is that's a game he'll never be able to get 1000/1000 in. In the end it seems developers need to make a balancing act, with achievements that require no skill, some that are just jokes (a couple games have achievements for starting a new game), and others that require effort but not necessarily skill. There are few achievements that require players to put real effort into it (no matter how hard I try, though, I may never get Mile High Club in Modern Warfare, despite having Veteran done and under my belt).
Sometimes having the achievements there as a road map is appreciated, though. There are some games that I don't mind playing, but they aren't fun enough that the constant thought of returning them to GameFly isn't on my mind. I have this with Dark Void at the moment. However, with games I'm truly enjoying, I might actually forget about some of the achievements or if I check back I automatically skip past the story ones to see what achievements I need to get based on finding items or side quests, etc. Darksiders and Dragon Age are good examples of that.
Either way, I don't find them useless. After all, completing level is an experience and thus should go towards my leveling up.
www.gamertagged.net
http://gamekrib.com/criticalhit
Whether or not you liked the main quest in Oblivion is a different debate.
Another aspect I forgot to touch on is that they can help jog your memory in games that don't have an easy to access log system. Oblivion tracks everything you do, but if you've been off doing side-quests then your log is full of reports from those, and it can be difficult to sift through to the main quest entries. A quick glance at those achievements, however, can remind you of what you last did, and thus what you need to do next. I found this to be more helpful in Fallout 3 than in Oblivion, but it has helped in other games too.
Beware of False Messages
XBL/PSN/Steam - Ahrezmendi
I was looking at the TrueAchievements list for RF: Guerrilla today.
Tracking 788 gamers.
-782 finished the tutorial. (Only lost 6 in the first few minutes!)
-491 finished Parker. (The drop off in the first area is significant.)
-271 finished Dust
-191 Badlands
-182 Oasis
-139 Eos
-136 Finished
The most obvious drops were during the first few levels. If you finished the second area you were 50/50 to finish the game.
It would appear that the "signal to developers" is a much more worthy theory than "entices folks to keep playing".
Hypatian wrote:
I really appreciate signpost achievements. Finishing a level or chapter or whatnot is still an achievement, certainly no less than anything else in games that's called an "achievement". So why not get the acknowledgment from the system, and also not feel like you have to go out of your way to get access to those achievements?
I totally disagree. First, "retarded" is a pretty weak argument. Second, I think they are great analogues for chapters in a book, or minutes in a movie, and I would no more want those hidden (somehow). Half-Life 2's Marc Laidlaw described it pretty nicely:
Signpost achievements serve this purpose very well. They give me a sense of how far I have yet to go in a game's narrative, and aid the pacing and get me amped up for the climax as I know it approaches, just as when I can see the last pages in the book I'm reading become fewer and fewer.
XBL | Steam | BGG
"When Gravey wins an internet argument, it's like the whole internet wins." - oilypenguin
"I love you, Gravey, you taffer." - Clock
Funny, I think about Gamerscore in much the same way. You should join TrueAchievements. They give you little notifications when you hit major score milestones (the 'level up', so to speak).
Wordy, how are the guild quests and main quest the worst part of Oblivion?
XboxLive: Clemenstation
I lol'd.
I do think the story-line achievements have gotten rather ridiculous, though. Forza 3 rewards you for each of your first ten driver levels, in addition to five car levels. In my first 90 minutes of play of that game I had unlocked 19 achievements. And how can any discussion of signposting be complete without this little gem?
I like the cut of your jib, Minarchist. -- Podunk
What Minarchist said. -- Paleocon
Listen to Minarchist, for he is wise. -- Jonman
I was surprised that this wasn't the first achievement from Prince of Persia.
My Latest: Insufficient Resources and Hands in the Dark
Just the main quest, which ended up being a distraction from all the fun stuff you could be doing.
Pyroman wrote:
Gravey wrote:
Google Profile
This actually makes me think of the Bioshock 2 achievements for going up in rank in multiplayer. I guess that can be used by developers in a similar manner as signposts in seeing how much time people invested into multiplayer before just giving up.
Though I do long to go back to Bioshock 2 again...
www.gamertagged.net
http://gamekrib.com/criticalhit
Why do you need an acknowledgment from the system? If the game designers want to include signposts along the way, there's nothing from stopping them from doing so. Assassin's Creed 2 did this very blatantly, and the little trophy/achievement I got at the same time was redundant at best. Good game design should be able to provide you with a sense of the pacing without needing to hit you over the head with it with an achievement.
Steam: Dysplastic
Well I don't think the "bloop" is hitting me over the head with it. But they're part of the Xbox's structure, so when the game is long gone and forgotten your profile still has a record of that. So in that way it's not redundant. I think that's a good use of the existing system. If achievements didn't exist, then there'd be no loss, but since they're here I don't think the addition hurts. Games with good pacing are also few and far between, and definitely very few games provide something like a table of contents for the new player, who might be interested in getting an idea of the length ahead of them. So signpost achievements fill that role.
XBL | Steam | BGG
"When Gravey wins an internet argument, it's like the whole internet wins." - oilypenguin
"I love you, Gravey, you taffer." - Clock
Getting achievements for just playing through a game, level by level, feels like a digital "thank you for wasting so many hours of your time playing our game because we know you could actually be doing other more meaningful things."
And it's always good to thank people.
"Yeah, well, uh, just keep your Power Gloves off her, pal, huh?" -Corey, from "The Wizard"
That's one of my favorite things about achievements. It's interesting to look back and find I plowed through some games, while other games I played over the course of months in drips and drabs. Sometimes I went right back and played a game over again, and sometimes I took a long break in between playthroughs.
It's like that scene in Hi-Fidelity where John Cusack's character is organizing his records:
Dick: It guess it looks as if you're reorganizing your records. What is this though? Chronological?
Rob: No...
Dick: Not alphabetical...
Rob: Nope.
Dick: What?
Rob: Autobiographical.
Redwing wrote:
I think this list shows the value of signpost achievements to a player.
By getting achievements through playing the game you are doing more than most owners of the game do. If that isn't an achievement then I don't know what is.
Me, I like them. If not for signposts I would never have got any gamerscore.
Steam~Twitter~Raptr~B.Net
Mystic Violet wrote:
There's a certain amount of comedic enjoyment I get from some of the well conceived signpost achievements. Sure, they are redundant in that I am rewarded both with a continuing narrative and with the achievement, but achievements like "Freebaird!" in Gears of War 2 make me laugh during games with a lot of tongue in cheek humor. That really adds to the experience for me.
Steam id: JollyBill
Xbox Live: JollyBillz
This is where signpost achievements come into their own. With a reasonable sample size, they're a fantastic indicator of the 'moreishness' of a game. I actually use them as research for older games that I'm thinking of picking up, first on 360voice.com, and now on TA.
A game where a significant portion of the signpost cheevs remain unearned among the community speaks to a game that simply isnt fun in the long run, and it's a red flag for a puchasing decision.
XBL: Spiffing Wotwot
LarryC wrote:
I found it interesting that Epic claimed that 60% of Gears of War 2 players never finished the campaign (meaning 40% did).
On TA, you can see that 83% of all registered users beat the game on Casual, while 74% finished it on Normal difficulty (if you beat it on Normal you also get the achievement for Casual).
52% beat the game on Hardcore, and 33% beat it on Insane.
TA is a community for self-selected competionists so it makes sense that the numbers would be higher than Epic's numbers for total install base, but I wasn't expecting such a stark contrast. I also wasn't expecting so many people to beat the game on Casual but not Normal. I don't know anybody who plays a game on the easiest difficulty (without moving up to harder levels once they acquire some basic mastery). Maybe narrativists do? Or 'tourists'. Whatever categorical box you want to shove them into, I guess. I want to know who these people are.
Difficulty-based achievements are a bit of a peripheral topic to signposts, and will probably get their own article one day, but I very much enjoy having a window into these kind of player demographics. Signposts, like Jonman mentioned above, are a manner of summarizing and understanding how a game was received by its player base.
XboxLive: Clemenstation
I'm not that surprised, actually. This really points to something that I think we have a tendency to forget: those of us talking about games on the internet and hanging around at places like TrueAchievements and GWJ are a minority of gamers.
In this case, given your source, I'm going to guess they did it for the achievement.
My Latest: Insufficient Resources and Hands in the Dark
But why didn't they want the Normal achievement too, I wonder? Bored of the game? Rental return?
There's not a huge difficulty jump from Casual to Normal in the campaign, and when games 'stack' difficulty achievements (e.g. unlock the hard one, get the medium and easy one too) achievement hookers tend to aim as high as their skill level will allow, looking for the bigger time-to-Gamerscore payoffs.
XboxLive: Clemenstation
I are these people.
I usually play games on Easy, sometimes Normal depending on mood. I drop back to Easy if I encounter the slightest frustration. I'm not playing for the challenge, nor for the OCD. On later playthroughs I may up the difficulty to a higher level if I get bored or anticipate that I might.
I played through Mass Effect three times on Casual (the first might have been normal, don't remember). I'm now playing through as a Renegade on Hardcore (which is not that tough when you're level 60 with all the best gear), just because I was getting a bit bored as I know the story backwards and forwards.
Both my Mass Effect 2 playthroughs were on Casual. I play the main Halo games on Legendary now, only because - again - I've played through on easy and normal so many times the story no longer holds anything new for me to discover.
Hans
jdzappa wrote:
I'll do this a fair amount, too. If the game's mechanics aren't fun but the story or setting are, I'll drop it down. Especially if the mechanics are full-on annoying.
Pyroman wrote:
Gravey wrote:
Google Profile
Yup, this is how I approach rentals of games that I'm more interested in the story and world, and feel the combat or dexterity mechanics are so-so: Dragon Age, Metro 2033. I'll play on Normal until the first multi-repeated failure, then I bump it down to Easy so I can see as much as possible before the due date.
XBL | Steam | BGG
"When Gravey wins an internet argument, it's like the whole internet wins." - oilypenguin
"I love you, Gravey, you taffer." - Clock
Shooters I will often start on easy because I play them for the rollercoaster ride rather than the challenge. If it's really easy I will turn it up though. I did play Bioshock on normal because I knew it was very easy.
Other games; RPG, RTS, other strategy I will start at a higher difficulty to explore the mechanics better.
When I was playing 360 and interested in the low hanging fruit achievements I would play on a harder difficulty to get the stacked signposts, as Clem mentioned.
Steam~Twitter~Raptr~B.Net
Mystic Violet wrote:
I'll take "signpost" achievements and trophies any day over asinine "play this game for 500 hours" ones.
Me (although I'm not on TA, I don't know if that disqualifies what you are looking for). I'm poor at shooters, I found the game very difficult, and I'm a "narrativist" I guess who wants to play games through the storyline. Even sandbox games like Grand Theft Auto, I don't do a ton of messing around.
I don't necessarily play to breeze through games, though; I select the difficulty level that gives me challenge without frustration. Gears of War got played on easy, Bioshock and Uncharted gets normal, but the original Mass Effect I stepped up to the highest unlockable difficulty.
That's just me though; I don't know whether I speak for anyone else.
Certis wrote: