So, what're you playing?

[Samwise]

Now that I've gotten several hours into Last Of Us and no longer hate it, I kinda like it.

I think it would have been a better movie than a game, though.  I still groan every time I get to an actual "gameplay" part; I've just gotten better at getting through them quickly.  I actually cheered out loud when they talked about it being a long way to Salt Lake CityColorado and then just cut directly there without any tiresome "uhoh, we have to stealth past a hundred clickers to get to the highway" interludes.

(edit: lol, I remembered it wrong, that was Colorado, and now that I'm almost to Salt Lake City there is indeed a "stealth past a hundred clickers to get to the highway".  MY BAD.)

[Signe]

I just finished World of Hidden Art.  I want to play the second one but the adverts are too annoying. 

[Jeff Kelly]

I have finished Rayman Origins and I'm now playing the new Tomb Raider on PS4.

I've also realized once again why I hate achievements. The achievements for Rayman: Origin would require you to play the multiplayer challenges each day for three to six months in order for you to get every achievement.

[KallDrexx]

I have finished Rayman Origins and I'm now playing the new Tomb Raider on PS4.

I've also realized once again why I hate achievements. The achievements for Rayman: Origin would require you to play the multiplayer challenges each day for three to six months in order for you to get every achievement.

Wow, that's retarded

[Sky]

I love those kind of achievements in games.

[Jeff Kelly]

There are seven achievements that you can only get by playing the multiplayer challenge mode

- Win a Bronze Cup in one of the Challenges
- Win a Silver Cup in one of the Challenges
- Win a Gold Cup in one of the Challenges
- Beat a friend at one challenge
- Beat a friend at 30 challenges

Those are more or less doable

Then there's:

- reach the final level of awesomeness
- get 1 million lums

For the first you need to get to Awesomeness Level 11. For each level you need successively more points. Points are awarded for winning Diamond, Gold, Silver or Bronze Cups (50, 10, 5 and 1 point respectively) after beating the game and getting all 700 Teensies you are still 1900 points away from Level 11.

If you play all daily and weekly challenges and always win Gold you get 160 points per week. It would then still take you nearly 12 weeks to get to Awesomeness Level 11. Cups are awarded on a curve though. You have to be better than a minimum value to get bronze, have to be better than x% of gamers to get silver, have to be better than y% of players to get gold and so on. To get Diamond (50 pts.) you have to belong to the top 1% of players in that challenge so forget it. It's much more likely that you'll end up withsome bronze, some silver and some gold cups per weeks and not all gold. You'll end up spending anywhere from 12 (all Gold all the time) to 118 weeks (All Bronze all the time) doing every daily and weekly challenge until you get that achivement, depending on your skill level and the skill level of your opponents.

The same with the money achievement: After completing the game you'll end up with 450,000 to 500,000 lums. If you get only Gold Cups you end up with 80,000 lums per week so if you play every daily and weekly challenge you still need to play seven weeks total to get to 1 million. If - as is more likely - you end up getting a mix of Gold, Silver and Bronze awards it will be even more time.

[Phildo]

I don't know, I kind of like the idea that there is actually an achievement for a long-term commitment to a game you like.  That's what I'd actually call an Achievement.  There are games I've been playing off and on for years, and it would be kind of nice to get a trophy.

[Jeff Kelly]

I love those kind of achievements in games.

I usually completely ignore achievements.

It was a great idea but nowadays most devs use achievements as an additional player retention strategy instead of an additional level of challenge and reward. This has lead to the abomination that is multiplayer achievements, a set of achievements you'll likely never have the chance of completing ever if you are late to the party for a game. It has also lead to achievements that no longer challenge you but instead reward blind dedication to a game for extensive amounts of time.

'Play that game or game mode every day for a year' is neither a challenge nor particularly interesting. It's the equivalent of farming and if you're unlucky you end up not getting it even if you are dedicated enough because the game dev decides to shut down multiplayer before you are able to complete it.

Rockstar is particularly appalling when it comes to achievements and especially multiplayer achievements. Red Dead Redemption for example had one multiplayer achievement for killing a Rock Star Employee in a multiplayer match.

As I said I mostly ignore achivements or at least try to but I still find it mildly infuriating when I encounter blatantly stupid or exploitative ones. Especially when they need ridiculously long timeframes to complete or are circumstantial enough that you have a chance of not getting them if you bought the game six months after release.

[Jeff Kelly]

I don't know, I kind of like the idea that there is actually an achievement for a long-term commitment to a game you like.  That's what I'd actually call an Achievement.  There are games I've been playing off and on for years, and it would be kind of nice to get a trophy.

It's not the commitment part per se. It's that the way to get those is usually either not fun or they are on a timer because you have to do them before the publisher decides to switch off multiplayer after six months or a year.

I liked the way the Mass Effect series did it. I have 'platinumed' all three games over the years because I could do it by replaying the game(s) as different classes using different abilities and because there are no multiplayer-only achievements. So it suited the 'I've played the game off and on over the years' style and every playthrough I ended up with a few new achievements without really putting too much planning into it. It worked because I love those games and wanted to replay them anyway.

Unfortunately most games don't really put much thought into achievements instead opting for the 'how can we manipulate people into playing a particular part of our game for as long as possible' way of doing achievements. I just find that not very appealing.

In the case of Rayman. The challenge mode is neither challenging enough nor fun enough for me to justify a time investment of 12 weeks to 2 years just to complete all achievements. It's also not really a way to reward dedication to a game it's just a way to get some people to keep playing and to farm for it even though they might no longer like it anyway.

[Sky]

I support seemingly possible but actually impossible achievements.

[Sky]

Anyway, I'm going to attempt playing every unplayed game in my steam library for at least an hour.

[Hawkbit]

Tomb Raider is on PSN for free.  I'm about an hour in and it's not terrible.  Not great, either.

Alternate titles could have been "Shaky-Cam the game" or "Bad things keep happening to this young lady, over and over and over again".

[Phildo]

There should be an achievement for killing a Rockstar employee in EVERY game.

[Ingmar]

Anyway, I'm going to attempt playing every unplayed game in my steam library for at least an hour.

I try to do stuff like that to keep myself from spending money during Steam sales, sometimes it works. Usually I set a goal to play 10 games from the backlist to "completion", whether that means finishing the game, or playing enough of it to determine that it sucks and I'm done with it. Sometimes that means playing a game for like 10 minutes.

[Sky]

In descending order of metascore...so I start with Portal 2. It won't be a hardship for a while :) At some point it will get real weird with stuff that was bundled in developer packs.

[Tannhauser]

Been playing Rome Total War and switched to Medieval Total War tonight as France.  Pope calls for a Crusade, I send my Prince and the turn after the Holy Roman Empire sneak attacks me.    But since they are brothers in Christ, I released any captives I took in battle.  Pope calls for cessation of hostilities.  HRE refuses and stabs me AGAIN.  Pope excommunicates HRE.  Outnumbered 6:1, but he has no horse and that's all I have.  I run him in circles, like a matador around a bull.  The bull, exhausted, falls.  I take many, many prisoners.  Execute every single one of them.  They are no longer brothers in Christ.

[Stormwaltz]

[rk47]

devs use achievements as an additional player retention strategy

Uh..what.
You can't return purchased games man.

[Tebonas]

Its ancient history to you young ones now, but there used to be a market for used games on physical media.

[Jeff Kelly]

devs use achievements as an additional player retention strategy

Uh..what.
You can't return purchased games man.

It's not about returning games in that case but about keeping people playing those games longer. Look at most multiplayer modes for most games that are not Battlefield or CoD. Three months after release they are barren places, bereft of life and no one is playing those multiplayer modes anymore. Usually because people have finished the game and moved on to something else or because they get their multiplayer fix from CoD or Battlefield anyway. Mass Effect 3 is the exception of the rule really and most of that is probably because it was probably the only 'horde mode' cooperative multiplayer mode available at the time apart from Gears of War.

That's why those games have usually dozens of multiplayer achievements often even significantly more than single player achievements or they  favor achievements that focus on time invested in the game/campaign instead of skill/challenges completed. Red Dead has over fifty achievements and 80% of those are for a multiplayer mode everybody stopped caring about three months from release anyway.

It's to keep you playing longer than you probably would have otherwise so that you are still invested in the game when the DLCs hit.

[Sky]

over fifty achievements and 80% of those are for a multiplayer mode everybody stopped caring about three months from release anyway.

Interesting debate tactic there.

[Jeff Kelly]

There's a probably missing there that seemingly got lost while I was writing the post. It's also not really a debating tactic at least I didn't intend it as such.

As I said previously I was late to the party on Red Dead Redemption. I probably bought it six months to a year after release on a hunch. I can't recall the exact date anymore but it was before the GotY edition came out which means it's at most a year after initial release. Red Dead has 97 achievements, if you count the main game (49) all addons and DLC (10 each) and undead nightmare, most of which are for the multiplayer. By the time I was playing it was almost impossible to do anything in multiplayer since nearly nobody was playing anymore.

It's hard to actually say for certain how many people were playing that particular multiplayer then but since Sony now tracks rarity of achievements I can at least offer an indication. The Xbox was probably the more popular platform and I've played it there but I can't get to any sort of info as to the achievements there.

As for the PS3 version:

Legends and Killers was the second expansion pack and it came out in August of 2010, three months after RDR's release. All ten achievements are marked as Ultra Rare with less than 2% completion. Liars and Cheats was the third expansion pack and it came out in September of 2010, four months after RDR's release. All ten achievements are marked as Ultra Rare with less then 2% completion. In fact only Outlaws to the End, the first DLC from June of 2010 has any achievements that are marked as Very Rare with about 8% completion but only for achievements that you can pretty much collect on your first multiplayer game. Everything else is marked Ultra Rare.

Only undead nightmare features achievements that more than 20% of all players have completed and those are for the single player.

The situation on the Xbox is very likely to be better since probably more people played the Xbox version but to me it seems like not that many people actually cared about RDR's multiplayer to begin with if 90% of its audience didn't play any multiplayer at all and 8% didn't play more than a few multiplayer matches right after release. At least on PS3 nobody cared, It's likely that the situation on the Xbox wasn't entirely different.

[Setanta]

I've been playing Talisman (Steam release) and finished a game over a few evenings as it allows you to continue a PvAI game. Faithful to the board game, the only flaw is the face to face interaction I remember from playing it in the 80s. Simple, fun and I'll be interested to see what the DLC brings.

[Samwise]

Finished The Last Of Us -- ending was good, still think it would have been a better movie than a game.

Played through Hotline Miami.  That was more fun than I expected -- I think based on the reviews I was expecting it to be more frustrating, but the levels are short and sweet enough that even when they're a bit of a cockstab they don't hurt much.  The worst level on that front was the final boss fight, and only because it started with a cutscene each time on top of being ridiculously hard.  Loved the aesthetics and the weird narrative devices (in service of a complete non-story, lol).

Also messing around a bit with Reus -- it's not a great game but has a nice Zen garden quality to it so I'll probably keep it installed for occasions where I need a chillaxed game experience.

[Yegolev]

I stopped caring about multiplayer achievements when Achievements were new.

I was going to play some Batman Arkham 3 but the boy came in and took the TV so I went and did the dishes.

I started playing Disgaea 3 again and the boy became fascinated with it.  So now I can't play it without him.

At least everyone still hates Borderlands 2.

[Sky]

the levels are short and sweet enough that even when they're a bit of a cockstab they don't hurt much. 

That's the thing. They really hit a good mix of ball-crushing without actually crushing the balls. I ended up getting distracted before too long, but the first boss fight was the only part of the game I didn't like in what I played.

Game 1 of Sky's Backlog Destruction Camp: Portal 2. I loved the original, so of course I'm enjoying this one. Two thoughts. 1. Dat FOV. Bleargh. 2. Aww, where did Steven Merchant go?

[HaemishM]

You haven't even gotten to the intro of J.K. Simmons yet, have you? That's when Portal 2 really comes into its own.

[Sky]

Portal 2 was a great game. Pretty short, though, even for me.

Game 2 of Sky's Backlog Destruction Camp: Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory (surely got points just for brevity)

This will be a bit more of an endurance test. 2005 was a looong time ago and it shows. The intros were a janky jumbled mess of quick cuts and horrible music and VO. We'll let the terrible animation slide, it would be in what, fourth grade if it were a child...The gameplay and levels, yikes. I tried on stealth, of course, but I think I'll try again with a more combatty loadout. The worst part really is the keyboard layout, followed closely by a bunch of crappy video tutorials I'm not about to sit through. Full disclosure: I love stealth games but I've always disliked the Splinter Cell (I played a bit, maybe even this one, briefly on the xbox when I was given copies).

A half hour in, so we're halfway to our next game!

[jakonovski]

It's got Michael Ironside, therefore it's forever perfect.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFgg3vHw6ms

[Sky]

No.

Also, I can't believe they're charging $10 for such a janky old creaker.

[Sky]

Well, it ended up being the first game enjoyed for comedic aspect. I had thought it would've taken a lot longer to get to those! More fun with the fiancee watching.

"My whole hour will be spent with that guy yelling at me in Arabic as he hides behind that rock."
"Why do you keep poking holes in gas tanks"
"I thought there was another guy here...oh he ran around the corner and then died alone."

.9 hours is close enough.

Game 3 of Sky's Backlog Destruction Camp: GalCiv 2

There's a lot of cool stuff in these, I had played the original. But it really seemed kind of flat and uninviting, after more than an hour I'm getting the same vibe. Would've been nice to have gotten this closer to the release date, before it hit Steam this thing was so damned expensive for so long.

[Falconeer]

I've been playing Talisman (Steam release) and finished a game over a few evenings as it allows you to continue a PvAI game. Faithful to the board game, the only flaw is the face to face interaction I remember from playing it in the 80s. Simple, fun and I'll be interested to see what the DLC brings.

I loved the boardgame, I still have all the boxes of the 2nd edition. While stupid, it was huge amounts of fun. I was tempted to get it to play with my old high school friends, with Skype or Google Hangouts help. Would you say the UI is smooth and satisfying, meaning kind of pleasant and doesn't get in the way?

Also, I am playing Smite as I've been for the past six months and this is literally hurting my gaming life since I have a hard time taking breaks and play anything else. Here and there I play EQ Landmark and Euro Truck Simulator 2, and then supposedly I'm advancing Dragon Age 2 preparing myself for the upcoming third chapter, and Far Cry 3 which I like but hasn't been able to get my off of my Smite addiction.

Dark Souls 2, coming this week, is probably what I'm going to play for the rest of the month.

[Sky]

Falc, there's a demo. http://www.talisman-game.com/prologuedemo/

I enjoyed it.

[Ironwood]

Thanks Sky.

[Khaldun]

I just did a bunch of GalCiv2 a week ago, and had the same feeling. I can't explain it, but "flat" is really the word for it. Just, nothing hooks me. It feels like a great 4X AI & mechanics in search of a game.