Topic: System-Level Achievements Coming to Wii U

[the_dan_x]

Reggie spills the beans about what gamers can expect from achievements on Nintendo's next home console.

http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/news/30726

The Wii U will have system-level achievements, Nintendo of America president Reggie Fils-Aime revealed in a recent interview with Kotaku.

According to Fils-Aime, some of the top game designers working for Nintendo do not want an achievement system in their games similar to the ones found on Microsoft’s Xbox 360 or Sony’s PlayStation 3, which means that achievements will not be required for every game. The achievement system will be very similar to what is found in the Nintendo 3DS in the StreetPass Mii Plaza.

“Once you start getting into game-specific [achievements] that’s developer driven.” Although the companies like Microsoft may require every game to have Achievements, Fils-Aime remarked, “That is not our philosophy.”

[TurdFurgy]

So is there an achievement system like 360/PS3 or is this just like Wii and 3DS?
I'm having a hard time understanding this.

[NWR_Neal]

So are we.

[geo]

So is there an achievement system like 360/PS3 or is this just like Wii and 3DS?
I'm having a hard time understanding this.

Sounds to me like it'll be closer to trophies/achievements, but it'll be totally optional.  I dont mind that at all.  What I do mind is that along with 'optional' comes freedom of how to utilize them.  Especially if it's points based, or it unlocks system-level rewards (think play-coins).  If there are no rules in place, you'll have stuff where mashing A in a game gives you 1,000,000 points, or where beating a game on super duper hard mode gives you 10 points.  As long as there is consistency between games, i'm fine with it.  If they are optional to devs, i'm fine with that, too.

[broodwars]

Well, it's disappointing (I think.  Reggie's not being terribly clear here.) that the achievement system seems to be optional because a few 3rd party developers complained.  I really enjoy trophy hunting in my PS3 games, and I have a suspicion that Nintendo making this "optional" means that for all intents and purposes it's not going to happen for most Wii U games.  It's work that developers can easily cut out if they're short on time or resources, which for most projects is the case.

[8bitsdeep]

Hopefully it's not point based, whatever it is.  Gamerscores are impossible to interpret.  Did this person play a ton of games for 5 mins or completely master every bit of 5 games?  It's an almost meaningless number in the end.  Trophies are much better in that regard.


Mega Man 9's achievements are still the only ones that have ever hooked me. (Damn you, Mr. Perfect!)  I'm fine with them being optional. I'd much rather that than having half-assed achievements where the devs don't care.  Hopefully there's a bit of system level integration though.  It could be the kind of thing that'd be fun to see pop up on the Miiverse.

[Chozo Ghost]

I'm glad they are including the option for trophies, but with that said I'm also glad they aren't forcing developers to use it if they don't want to. Sometimes its nice when games have achievements, but I don't think it should be forced. I think this was a good move on the part of Nintendo.

I was worried the Wii U wasn't going to have any achievement system at all, so this definitely puts my mind at ease that it is there as an option. Would it have been better for gamers if it was mandatory that developers use it? I don't know about that. If you put too many requirements on developers they may just decide to not support you at all. But its never a bad thing to have stuff be available as options.

Plus as we see on the PS360, when developers are FORCED to do achievements when they don't want to, they will do it in the most half assed and unenjoyable way possible.

[broodwars]

If you put too many requirements on developers they may just decide to not support you at all.

And yet developers still eagerly support Microsoft (despite Achievements being mandatory this entire generation) and Sony (whose trophies became mandatory in 2009).  There's Steam Achievements on PC, too.

[Chozo Ghost]

If you put too many requirements on developers they may just decide to not support you at all.

And yet developers still eagerly support Microsoft (despite Achievements being mandatory this entire generation) and Sony (whose trophies became mandatory in 2009).  There's Steam Achievements on PC, too.

Brood, I don't think it only being optional is going to have much of an impact on how many games on the Wii U support it, and I will tell you exactly why: because in the case of multiplatform games the work for the achievements is already done. They can reuse the art from the other platforms and just copy and paste it into their Wii U port as well. So it would be a trivial thing for them to implement. Its not like they would have to make new artwork or whatever for each console. They just do it once, and then reuse it over all of them. Or they could just cheap out and use some generic artwork for every single achievement. I've seen a lot of games on the PS3 where every trophy shares the same image, which sucks, but at least its better than nothing I guess.

The only time where this might be a problem is in exclusive Wii U games which aren't multiplatform, so in those cases they can't copy and paste them from the PS360 version. But we all know 3rd party exclusives on Nintendo hardware are few and far between.

So the bottom line is even though in theory the feature is only optional, I think in practice it will be used in most cases. You also should take into account the pressure fans might put on developers to include them.

[Ian Sane]

Having it optional is actually the best option.  Just as long as Nintendo has some standardized infrastructure in place so that it's easy to do.  I assume that's what they're doing because the Wii technically have optional achievements now.  There is nothing stopping you from programming them in your game.

How do Sony and MS enforce mandatory achievements?  I wouldn't want any in my game.  Could I get away with one single achievement when you start the game called "mandatory achievement Microsoft made me put in"?

[broodwars]

How do Sony and MS enforce mandatory achievements?

Mandatory system standards.  All the console manufacturers have them for various things from achievements to crash-prevention, and if you fail to meet them, the respective platform holder won't allow your game to pass through certification.  You won't be allowed to publish your game if you can't pass certification.

Could I get away with one single achievement when you start the game called "mandatory achievement Microsoft made me put in"?

No, because there's no such thing as a 1,000 point achievement.  Now, you could have 10 100-point achievements named such things, with a similar amount of Gold trophies for a Sony title.  Just see Terminator Salvation for an example of this.

[Chozo Ghost]

The reason you want them to be standardized and system wide is so that all your online buddies/friends can be able to see them. You should be able to click onto one of your friends/buddies on the Wii U and pull up their profile and through that be able to see the achievements they've done, and they should be able to see yours as well. Having it being system wide puts it all together and helps it be more organized and easier to access.

[UncleBob]

So... a ****-waving contest?

[Chozo Ghost]

So... a ****-waving contest?

Pretty much, yeah. But its all in good fun.

[broodwars]

So... a ****-waving contest?

Pretty much, yeah. But its all in good fun.

Yep, plus I've found achievement systems to be a good way to encourage me to do things I might otherwise not bother with.  I know I wouldn't have gotten as much out of Dead Space 2 (yeah, beat Hard Core mode and then tell me there's no survival horror in that game), the two Bioshocks, and the two FF 13s without them, that's for sure.

[Chocobo_Rider]

“Once you start getting into game-specific [achievements] that’s developer driven.” Although the companies like Microsoft may require every game to have Achievements, Fils-Aime remarked, “That is not our philosophy.”

Thank god!!

[Ian Sane]

Could I get away with one single achievement when you start the game called "mandatory achievement Microsoft made me put in"?

No, because there's no such thing as a 1,000 point achievement.  Now, you could have 10 100-point achievements named such things, with a similar amount of Gold trophies for a Sony title.  Just see Terminator Salvation for an example of this.

So the requirement is a minimum amount of points then?  Well then I figure I would go with the minimum amount of achievements I could get away with and alternate them between being ridiculously easy and ridiculously hard (can I make "get 100% completion and then delete your save" an achievement?)  And I would make sure all the descriptions made fun of the whole concept and implied that Microsoft and any player that cares about achievements is a tool.  I just have a kneejerk reaction to anything that is mandatory for no good reason.  If Microsoft mandates achievements, then they suck and my company would put as little effort into them as possible.  And then if we had a really popular series that we knew MS wanted on their system, we would play hardball and refuse to put any in at all.  Like MS would let something like Call of Duty not be on their system if Activision didn't want to do achievements.

[Mataata]

Basically, like Steam.

[Ceric]

This sounds like Steam.  I'm ok with that.  I'm sure its not 3rd party moaning as much as people inside of Nintendo moaning about having achievements though I think Miyamoto would have a field day with achievements.

[TJ Spyke]

Now, you could have 10 100-point achievements named such things, with a similar amount of Gold trophies for a Sony title.  Just see Terminator Salvation for an example of this.

The minimum is 5 achievements per game and totaling 1000 points (of course, they now allow developers to go above that total when you add in DLC), which many early Xbox 360 games had (the first Avatar game was famous for achievement whores buying/renting because you could get all 5 achievements and a easy 1000 points in 5 minutes). Achievements are better than trophies because it's quick and easy to compare to others (for example). I wish Nintendo would require it, especially since most multplatform games will already have them anyways. Not a big deal, though it is why I often picked the 360 version of a game.

[nickmitch]

I'm glad Nintendo is taking a stance by making them optional. Maybe now people will get over them, and they can be used in fun ways that me play a game differently in stead of "# kills achievement" "completed story mission achievement" "completed story mission on hard achievement" etc.

[StrawHousePig]

Yes, prepare to feel inadequate.


What happened to playing video games just being fun? /oldtimer

[NWR_insanolord]

When used properly, achievements can make a good game even better. I always use the example of Geometry Wars 2 on XBLA; the things those achievements made you do were new ways to look at the gameplay, and offered real challenges that you probably wouldn't have come up with on your own. Now, most games don't do it that well, but I'm glad Nintendo is giving the developers the tools to do them if they want to.

[broodwars]

And I would make sure all the descriptions made fun of the whole concept and implied that Microsoft and any player that cares about achievements is a tool.

*Achievement Unlocked! - "Janus" - Hypocritically mock the features someone else cares about in a video game console despite always bitching about certain missing features yourself - 0 points.*

[Chozo Ghost]

Ian isn't mocking the feature; he's mocking the policy of making said feature mandatory. I don't see how that's hypocritical. He even said he supports it being there as an option. Its the REQUIREMENT that he is griping about.