Epic to set limits on GoW2 achievement progress

by Dustin Burg { May 15th 2008 at 11:30AM }

During their interview with Cliffy B, the guys over at CVG learned an interesting Gears of War 2 achievement fact that will probably make "achievement whores" a bit furious. Scratch that, it will make achievement whores furious.

As it's currently planned, Epic will be "throttling" GoW2's achievements by limiting how much unlocking progress can be made per game or round. Cliffy gave an example of the unlocking system by saying that "if you're going for headshots, you get one headshot that counts and any other headshots won't count towards your Achievement" which is being done "so players don't just play to get headshots the entire round just to get Achievements." It's an interesting idea, but one we aren't sure we (or any achievement addicts for that matter) fully embrace.

[Thanks, shay07]

Tags: achievements, epic, epic-games, gears-of-war-2, gow2, spring-showcase-08

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)

Deck @ May 15th 2008 11:36AM

I am for sure not an achievement whore but I still think this is stupid. It all should count toward your achievement.

By doing this, they just make it such a pain in the ass that its annoying. Limiting them is a bad call on their part.

ethanjude @ May 15th 2008 2:27PM

This just presents a new problem. Instead of people taking multiple headshots, they are going to do one, then go looking for the shotty kill, or chainsaw, etc. You've eliminated 1 problem, but created another.

AnOffday @ May 15th 2008 10:05PM

Agreed. I wish Epic would read this.

STUPID IDEA.

Pat @ May 15th 2008 11:36AM

Absolutely.

I stopped playing ranked matches all together for that reason, and I know I'm not the only one.

Tony @ May 15th 2008 11:37AM

Well, I would imagine they would balance this out by drastically lowering the amount needed to get the achievement... So I'm not personally very bothered by it.

JAKEJAX @ May 15th 2008 11:39AM

That is a good point.

DjDATZ @ May 15th 2008 12:18PM

i agree. if they do this, they should make it that you have to get some 30 or so headshots...not 100...because that would require you to play 100 games and get at least 1 headshot in each. that's a LOT of games...

Quote the Raven @ May 15th 2008 11:38AM

That's F-tarded. If they want to slow it down, increase the amount of headshots neccesary to get the achievement. Getting a "100 Headshots in Multiplayer" Achievement will be stupid when you probably got 1000 along the way. I call Craptacular!

Dustin Burg @ May 15th 2008 11:41AM

Though I sort of agree with you, I think their justification for doing this is not to make it take longer to earn an achievement, but rather their aim is to prevent players from using or whoring ONE weapon the entire game JUST to get an achievement. So, in effect, they want people to play GoW2 multiplayer without feeling the need to only use a sniper the entire round just to earn an achievement. All said, I dunno about it ...

ryan @ May 15th 2008 11:54AM

i agree dustin. if there are weapon specific achievements this will force players to switch weapons up every round forcing them to get better and work for these achievements. it also makes for a fresher experience when you aren't being sniped by the same guy all the time.

i expect 20-50 shots with the sniper rifle and like do 30 melees with the chainsaw. 1 action per match, you can net all the achievements in 30-60 matches possibly that way.

Gary Harwell @ May 15th 2008 12:24PM

Here's my question: Why the hell does there need to be weapon-based achievements anyway? Call of Duty 4 is played religiously and they don't feel the need to complicate the multiplayer experience with achievements. Limiting players on what counts towards an achievements? That strikes me as extremely contrived. Honestly, let people play the games the way they want to. Why is it that Epic is so insistent on controlling the way we play Gears, what with the whole not letting us play with friends in ranked matches.

ryan @ May 15th 2008 1:01PM

^
who says you can't play the way you want to.

you don't have to abide by some "law of Achievements"!

play how you want to play.

ericdrum @ May 15th 2008 1:01PM

@Gary Harwell

Just because they aren't called achievements in CoD4 doesn't mean they don't affect gameplay like achievements. You do realize that in CoD4 people switch to non-sense weapons for the particular map and avoid killing guys with guns sometimes so that they can get their knife kill progress. CoD4 is not immune in any sense to people playing only for their particular wants and needs and ignoring the team.

pandlcg @ May 15th 2008 11:39AM

I think they're focusing a little too much on policing achievements. They could just take out multiplayer achievements like COD4 did and get the same result.

xenocidic @ May 15th 2008 11:39AM

I think they should throttle it enough to affect boosters but not enough to affect legitimate players

DjDATZ @ May 15th 2008 12:19PM

agree. a max of say 3 or 4 per match/game would be much better...

Misinformed DNA @ May 15th 2008 11:39AM

Well if the GoW achievements we're so insane to get, then they wouldn't have achievement problems. There were tons of "boost games" on GoW because the achievements were set too high. I mean "Seriously..."

What they really need is to be more creative with the achievements. I am so sick of "Do Z, X times". Yawn.

RudyHuxtable @ May 15th 2008 11:41AM

Or do what IW did with CoD4 and make all the achievements single-player related. Or make them kill related (1000 kills, 5000, 10000), or Win/Loss related. Then the problem of weapon whoring would be resolved. I think for me the idea of creating competition on your own team (who can get to the sniper rifle first) hurts the teamplay a little bit. Not always, but sometimes it feels like there's always one sparklefart on every team who refuses to play nice if he can't pick up snipe.

ZEBRA NINER @ May 15th 2008 11:48AM

That's a good idea. If it wasn't kill related, or maybe all in single player. I liked that I didn't have to worry about cheevos in the multiplayer of COD, something that infuriated me in Halo.

Multiplayer without cheevos let me enjoy the game more, and not concern myself with getting X amount of headshots or killing 4 people in 4 seconds.

RudyHuxtable @ May 15th 2008 12:00PM

Get 1000 assists.
Survive an entire round with all of your teammates.
Shut out an opposing team in a match with 5 rounds or more.
Rescue 100 teammates about to be executed.

Not:
Get 100 headshots.
Stomp 100 enemies.
Pick up boomshot 7 times in a row.

callum henderson @ May 15th 2008 11:49AM

They are doing what they did with the Gears PC achievements then - and believe me they took a Loooong time to earn.

TORO @ May 15th 2008 11:51AM

I think it's a good idea, in the end it's whores against whores.

Matthew @ May 15th 2008 11:52AM

My brother-in-law works for Epic, and he says the entire staff hates Cliffy B. The ENTIRE staff. So I don't know whether or not it was his idea to cap achievements like that, but I'm going to hate him all the same for it.

Andrew @ May 15th 2008 2:15PM

The guy seems like a toolbag to me...this is just another reason not to buy this overrated game.

Cal @ May 15th 2008 11:55AM

If it reduces tagging then I'm all for it...

thisguyrighthere @ May 15th 2008 11:58AM

Wouldn't this make them less like achievements and more like accidents?

If you're going for a headshot achievement then you have to go for headshots. If you only get one that counts per round or something then you wouldn't bother going for them. They would just happen whenever they happened making it much more a matter of dumb waiting and grinding than an actual accomplishment. Why have achievements at all if they're going to be reduced to a counting of random happenings that may or may not happen. This is idiotic.

DeadlyFrenchman @ May 15th 2008 12:05PM

Cliffy B i thought u were cool..........ur not

ogvor @ May 15th 2008 12:12PM

Yeah! I for one hate online achievements! Getting into a game where half your team isn't really trying becuase they have to use one weapon or grenade tag or whatever is really annoying. I hope Epic either does this or just does away with online acheivements completely.

PlayHarder @ May 15th 2008 12:19PM

They should make it like COD4, no multiplayer achievements.

UNSCleric @ May 15th 2008 12:23PM

There goes my purchase of GoW2, just going to be a rental now. This destroys the replay value..the little that the game had to begin with.

They should have just made them kill-related, or lots of cool single player ones. Epic sucks, as usual.

brian woolley @ May 15th 2008 12:30PM

hmm.. i see this a devious way of extending game life.. and also to perhaps maintain the #1 spot longer

peter @ May 15th 2008 12:30PM

MY GOD Stop teasing me...that's guy is soooo freaking hot

LOVE HIM

Gemini Ace @ May 15th 2008 12:36PM

Just keep the cheevos out of multiplayer, Cliffy. Otherwise, quit effing with the system.

ScrewTheJapanese @ May 15th 2008 12:36PM

They going to fix the absurd host advantage? I see plenty of talk about the multiplayer by Cliffy Douche, but no one is commenting on the thing that made GOW unfair and unplayable to me.

Chuckles @ May 15th 2008 1:03PM

I loved the GOW single player as I mostly played it coop with friends.... then I tried the multi and stopped playing it after about 5 games. Host advantage is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard of. The host already has a connection advantage and now they give him more damage????? Oh and waiting 5 minutes for a game to start and then you die and have to wait 3 or more minutes just for the next round is retarted.

Dom @ May 15th 2008 12:36PM

This is a great idea in my opinion. Achievement whores really ruin games. Hopefully they will cut the achievement in half to only 50 headshots total. And if there is a God, please no Seriously achievement Cliffy. I'm proud of my Seriously achievement no doubt but it was a pain in the ass.

DupontNumber24 @ May 15th 2008 12:38PM

Doesn't matter to me. I sucked so bad at multiplayer on GOW that I could only get one headshot per game anyway.

felkadelic @ May 15th 2008 12:38PM

I'll echo other the sentiments of other posters that many multiplayer achievements ruin the online gaming experience. I'd be happy if the only multiplayer achievements were related to winning rounds, or things like that -- achievements related to playing the game well as it was originally intended, not related to weapon whoring.

Mark C. @ May 15th 2008 12:39PM

This is one of the dumbest things I have ever heard of. Stop worrying about how you can force someone to play the game and focus on the game itself. Your achievements in the first game were so stupid that many people boosted to get them. Don't setup such stupid/ridiculously high achievements and maybe people won't boost as much.

And here is a question. WHO CARES IF PEOPLE BOOST? The Achievements are MEANINGLESS. You don't get anything for them, you can't cash them in, and you don't get any prizes for them. So grow up Cliffy B and stop being stupid.

If you don't want boosting, then put all the achievements in the SP game. It worked just fine for Call of Duty 4.

Needless to say, I will be talking about this in the next episode of the Xbox Podcast. That is for sure.

www.xboxpodcast.com

Ryan Hartman @ May 15th 2008 12:40PM

If they don't want people to horde weapons to focus on a given achievement ... don't make it an achievement. Simple as that.

People mention COD4s robust online experience as having no multiplayer achievements to speak of and while I think it's a good example, I don't know that I would follow it as a model.

Assuming that online achievements are a catalyst to increase multiplayer activity, why not just make the achievements focus more on kill counts, game variations, and things of that ilk? You take out the weapon specific kills and suddenly people aren't grabbing the weapon that they need ... they are grabbing the weapon that they want.

Or leave them in and shut up about it. The systems they are proposing sound convoluted. I understand what they are trying to do; it just seems like an unnecessary way to do it.

Emphar @ May 15th 2008 12:45PM

Lets look at recent MP games:
Halo 3 had achievements for MP but everyone whored to get them.

COD4 did not have MP achievements BUT has in game ranks and awards that actually do something. There are achievements in COD4 just not Gamer score achievements.

GoW2 could find a middle ground. Have maybe 2 or 3 achievements for reaching a rank. Everything else could be in-game only or have web based stats ala Halo 3 and BF2.

Teabag @ May 15th 2008 12:50PM

I think this is dumb. Achievements has so much potential for developers to be creative with and here we are with developers restricting the achievements.

I long for a dev team to be creative with their achievements. Epic gets thumbs down for this. Even though i am not an online player at all.

Vcize @ May 15th 2008 2:46PM

Crackdown had pretty good/fun achievements.

Rez @ May 15th 2008 12:50PM

It's the biddest stupid idea in the histor of stupid ideas, 'Scrap it Epic'. It sucks big time. It will be like drugs with no fix. Rez.

Ste @ May 15th 2008 12:52PM

Why do we need online achievements anyway? It's extremely rare that they're well implemented, and you'll still get people asking others in the game to give free headshots or whatever to get achievement X.

CoD4 was an awesome game, and that has 0 online achievements. I say just concentrate on doing offline achievements, online ones aren't needed and usually hamper the experience.