<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Achievements: do all games really need them?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://citystate.co.uk/archives/achievements-do-all-games-really-need-them/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://citystate.co.uk/archives/achievements-do-all-games-really-need-them/</link>
	<description>Observations on games by Robin Clarke</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 11 Mar 2012 13:33:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Iain</title>
		<link>http://citystate.co.uk/archives/achievements-do-all-games-really-need-them/comment-page-1/#comment-6488</link>
		<dc:creator>Iain</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Mar 2009 10:43:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://citystate.co.uk/?p=152#comment-6488</guid>
		<description>I like the idea of achievements for films:

Achievement Unlocked! - Total Numb Body Experience! (Managed to stay awake through all three hours of Magnolia. No, you can&#039;t get that time back.)

I&#039;m no fan of achievements in games myself. I take the line that if you get them for things you do for playing the game normally, then they&#039;re utterly worthless, and if they&#039;re there to artificially pad out your play time, then the developer should have put all that time they spent into coming up with all those wanky &quot;achievements&quot; into making a more interesting game instead.

But the thing I really object the most to is the implication that we need &quot;achievements&quot; to quantify our fun. I think it&#039;s hugely condescending on the behalf of the developer to assume we need to be patted on the head and reassured every five minutes that we&#039;ve &quot;achieved&quot; something. What&#039;s wrong with failure? It&#039;s character-building. If people aren&#039;t allowed to fail (even at a video game) then all we do is breed a culture in society where we expect to be rewarded handsomely for mediocrity. Wait... hang on, we already have that, don&#039;t we?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I like the idea of achievements for films:</p>
<p>Achievement Unlocked! &#8211; Total Numb Body Experience! (Managed to stay awake through all three hours of Magnolia. No, you can&#8217;t get that time back.)</p>
<p>I&#8217;m no fan of achievements in games myself. I take the line that if you get them for things you do for playing the game normally, then they&#8217;re utterly worthless, and if they&#8217;re there to artificially pad out your play time, then the developer should have put all that time they spent into coming up with all those wanky &#8220;achievements&#8221; into making a more interesting game instead.</p>
<p>But the thing I really object the most to is the implication that we need &#8220;achievements&#8221; to quantify our fun. I think it&#8217;s hugely condescending on the behalf of the developer to assume we need to be patted on the head and reassured every five minutes that we&#8217;ve &#8220;achieved&#8221; something. What&#8217;s wrong with failure? It&#8217;s character-building. If people aren&#8217;t allowed to fail (even at a video game) then all we do is breed a culture in society where we expect to be rewarded handsomely for mediocrity. Wait&#8230; hang on, we already have that, don&#8217;t we?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

