New Xbox 360 Achievement Rules Revealed? Options

[Xbox-Scene]

New Xbox 360 Achievement Rules Revealed? Posted by XanTium | April 27 21:56 EST | News Category: Xbox360

From 1up.com: [QUOTE] According to a "very credible source," there have been two important changes to the Achievements rules since that Gamerscore blog post in 2007: First, the new maximum points allowed for any retail game (including subsequent DLC) is 1,750 points, spread across no more than 80 Achievements. That puts those aforementioned titles that broke the 1,250 rule in the clear, although it still leaves Valve's The Orange Box unaccounted for with its 99 Achievements. We're assuming The Orange Box received special ex-post facto clemency, because it's awesome. The second rule is that every game can add a maximum of 250 new points and 10 Achievements through DLC every yearly quarter (but only until reaching the 1,750 point cap). And evidently this rule is also cumulative, so that theoretically, a developer could release a new game with 1,000 points, not add any new achievements for the next three quarters, and then release a massive 750-point DLC pack in the fourth quarter. The anonymous source explained this rule is meant to discourage developers from releasing a ton of content and all 750 points immediately after a game's release, and instead doll it out slowly over time. [/QUOTE] Full Story: 1up.com

[sabbath_dude]

Just more marketing BS from Microsoft then . Personally I preferred how it was in the beginning with 1000 points per game no exceptions. I like to try and unlock all the achievements in a game or as many as I can out of the original 1000 but if developers keep shifting the goal posts and adding 250 every few months then it kinda takes the fun out of it (for me anyway). And now you have to pay extra to 100% a game which is a little sad.

[Kupuntu]

I think this sucks. Without HDD, it's impossible to get those additional points. And I'm not going to buy for DLC anyway. I miss the PS1 times when the coolest thing invented was multi-CD games.

[DeMoN_DARREN]

I think 250 should be the maximum for DLC, any more seems stupid. Look at Halo 3, an extra 750 on the map packs just doesn't make sense.

Oh, and the 99 achievements for Orange Box was fantastic! Its the only game it would work for though and the current limit of 50 seems good enough

All in all, seems like unneeded tweaking

[Martinchris23]

I would have preferred a new rule which stated that all achievement points must be obtainable through offline play only, since having some achievements which can only be gotten from online play is totally unfair to those who don't wish to purchase a Gold subscription or have to wait for a free XBL weekend (which are very few and far between).

[trentdadi]

This is actually good news, it forces developers to increase the quality of their DLC because now much fewer people will buy the DLC just for the extra achievement points.

I will agree with you to an extent Martin, but I think having a few online achievements here and there is good, as long as they aren't hard. Some people have taken it way too far. For example, GRAW had some completely ridiculous achievements. To get 'Committed' you had to play Multiplayer for 8 hours straight and there is even an achievement for climbing to the top of the universal leaderboard...

[sabbath_dude]

This is actually good news, it forces developers to increase the quality of their DLC because now much fewer people will buy the DLC just for the extra achievement points.

But if they removed all achievements from DLC then wouldn't that force them even more to make sure the quality was up to scratch?.

Some people have taken it way too far. For example, GRAW had some completely ridiculous achievements. To get 'Committed' you had to play Multiplayer for 8 hours straight and there is even an achievement for climbing to the top of the universal leaderboard...

The 8 hour one could be done by simply starting a local match and leaving the console on for 8 hours . I do agree with you though. One of them was to climb to the top of the world leaderboard which was totally unrealistic and unachievable for probably 99% of players.

This post has been edited by sabbath_dude: Apr 29 2009, 04:53 AM

[sinister slipknot]

The 8 hour one could be done buy simply starting a local match and leaving the console on for 8 hours . I do agree with you though. One of them was to climb to the top of the world leaderboard which was totally unrealistic and unachievable for probably 99% of players.

I prefer achievements that you get for completing games/unlocking stuff naturally, i.e. not having to do stupid stuff like leaving your console on for 8 hours.. The dumbest achievement i've come across was on WWE Smackdown! vs Raw '07, for winning 50 consecutive online matches, which was the worst game for lag ever, i bet you two t3 connections would still have a laggy game.

[Martinchris23]

This is actually good news, it forces developers to increase the quality of their DLC because now much fewer people will buy the DLC just for the extra achievement points.

I will agree with you to an extent Martin, but I think having a few online achievements here and there is good, as long as they aren't hard. Some people have taken it way too far. For example, GRAW had some completely ridiculous achievements. To get 'Committed' you had to play Multiplayer for 8 hours straight and there is even an achievement for climbing to the top of the universal leaderboard...

I suppose one or two achievements online wouldn't be that bad, but the bottom line is you shouldn't need to pay extra money to unlock achievements. In a sense (unless you already have a Gold account) you would need to for those games which are mainly online achievements only.

Take CoD 4 - a fantastic game which doesn't require any online play to gain achievements, yet is still up there as one of the best (if not THE best) MP and SP games out there.

[sheeks]

I actually much prefer they way the ps3 is with the trophy system.
Its a much better way of implementing your scores.