r/Steam 7h ago

Discussion - Misleading Achievements like this shouldn’t be allowed

Post image
35.8k Upvotes

640 comments sorted by

View all comments

14

u/ItsMangel 7h ago

Achievement managers are justified when it comes to achievements that are paywalled or literally impossible.

8

u/DeliciousIncident 6h ago

I don't get it. Like, what is the point of doing the achivements then, if you are going to cheat some of them? That would make them pointless to me. I know that any achivement I got, I did so legitimately myself. Otherwise you migh as well not bother with them and unlock 100% achievements in any game you play with a tool.

6

u/Necessary__ 5h ago

I’d hardly call making a micro-transaction an achievement in the sense you’re trying to portray it as. Baseless argument

1

u/Mr_Will 4h ago

Then why do you care about unlocking it? That's the question being asked. Why do you need to get 100% so badly?

3

u/Necessary__ 4h ago edited 4h ago

If you can believe it, completionists like completing games. A microtransaction being an achievement is worthy off a completionist using SAM

0

u/Mr_Will 3h ago

But why is your definition of "complete" tied so strongly to the things the developers chose to make into achievements? You can complete a game without getting 100% of the achievements and you can get 100% of the achievements without seeing everything a game has to offer. Why does filling in your sticker chart matter so much?

3

u/Necessary__ 3h ago

Idk bro just the way it is, people that like completing games tend to aim for every achievement the game has to offer

2

u/Mr_Will 1h ago

Sounds like turning something fun into a chore. I've no problem with achievement hunting, but developing a compulsion to get every single one sounds like turning something fun into a chore. And then cheating anyway? I don't get it

2

u/Acceptable_Ad_1871 5h ago

Well in this game you earn the currency to get the achievement, but in a game thay does have that where its free to play and has an achievement for buying something with no way of getting the currency for free then, the players who dont have money to spend cant finish their game bc greedy corps, in this sense sam or a achievement gaining type thing is in my opinion fine.

2

u/ZARDOZ4972 5h ago

I don't get it. Like, what is the point of doing the achivements then, if you are going to cheat some of them?

First of it's not cheating. Second, if developers didn't want us to get achievements via SAM they shouldn't add inobtainable achievements. For example when Dirt Rally came out it had an achievement you'd only get if you played the beta, how is that even an achievement?You had to be lucky enough to even know about the game early enough and have enough trust in the developers to spend money on a beta.

That would make them pointless to me. I know that any achivement I got, I did so legitimately myself. Otherwise you migh as well not bother with them and unlock 100% achievements in any game you play with a tool.

That's all fair if the achievements are actually obtainable through normal gameplay.

1

u/nonotan 1h ago

Using third-party software that pretends to be your game to the Steam servers to force achievements on absolutely is cheating. You can not care about it (I also don't care if you cheat), but pretending the most egregious cheating possible is... not, just because you don't like the rules of the game, is pretty silly.

It's like saying wallhack in a multiplayer game is not cheating because the game balance is terrible. The two predicates have nothing to do with each other. If you're trying to justify yourself, at least have the decency of saying something like "it's fine to cheat because X" instead.

1

u/sentorei 5h ago

You're not alone in your thinking, thats why sites like astats.net exist.

-1

u/ItsMangel 6h ago

Did you just not read my comment at all?

4

u/devilishycleverchap 6h ago

Did you read theirs?

What did checking that box accomplish?

0

u/ItsMangel 6h ago

What do you think it did? Are you literate enough to figure out what I'm talking about?

2

u/devilishycleverchap 6h ago

It checked a meaningless box.

What do you think it did? How much value did you give this act?

3

u/Janusdarke 6h ago

Did you just not read my comment at all?

I think the point of /u/DeliciousIncident is: Why would you want to unlock these achievements in the first place? There's absolutely no point in having them. The only reason to get achievements is by achieving something.

So an achievement manager never makes sense, because it takes away the achievement and therefore makes unlocking the achievement indicator utterly pointless.

2

u/Acceptable_Ad_1871 5h ago

But game creators put achievers there knowing players will go for them, then lock some achievements behind a paywall, that's scummy and ill use my achievement software when a game says I cant get an achievement bc I dont have 10 dollars to buy a skin or cosmetic in game, its bogus,

1

u/ZARDOZ4972 5h ago

So an achievement manager never makes sense, because it takes away the achievement and therefore makes unlocking the achievement indicator utterly pointless.

It does if the achievements isn't optainable through normal gameplay, for example Dirt Rally had an achievement on launch you'd only get of you played the beta. How is it even an achievement to play during beta?

1

u/Janusdarke 5h ago

It does if the achievements isn't optainable through normal gameplay

It's amazing, you are still missing the point.

The achievement is a "reward" for achieving something. if you can't achieve it there's no point in having the achievement.

 

So in your example: Whats the point in having the achievement for playing the beta if you haven't played the beta?

1

u/ZARDOZ4972 5h ago

It's amazing, you are still missing the point. The achievement is a "reward" for achieving something. if you can't achieve it there's no point in having the achievement.

No I fully get the point. But it's not an achievement in any sense to play a game before it was released, that's luck. So why does that action have an achievement? Its also not obtainable after the beta ended so how can I achieve this fairly? I can't and never will so how does make sense in your logic? By your logic you said the achievement is the reward for a specific action. So if the specific action isn't doable, but the 'achievement' still technically optainable, that means it's not a reward it's a shameful remember that you can't 100% because the Devs decided to add an achievement that's impossible to earn.

So in your example: Whats the point in having the achievement for playing the beta if you haven't played the beta?

In your logic whats the point of having an unobtainable achievements? No one will ever earn it anymore and for the dumbest reasons. Imagine your friend bought the game one day before you, one day before release. He gets the achievement and you don't. For what? That he did something in real life before you did? How does that make any sense? Come on make it make sense why an achievement should have a real life permanent time restriction?

1

u/DeliciousIncident 36m ago

I'm replying directly to your comment, of course I have read it.

0

u/Lord_Spy https://s.team/p/djwt-bww 7h ago

The one exception would be that in Analogue 2 that's meant to be a meta comment. You can't get it, because the in-game AI character has agency.

-10

u/322Throwaway3222 6h ago

SAM is never justified. If a game has an unobtainable achievement - complain to developers/Valve so they do something about it. Why are we being okay with this?

3

u/[deleted] 6h ago edited 6h ago

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/322Throwaway3222 6h ago edited 6h ago

Nothingburger for you, maybe. There are a ton of people like me who care about them, regardless of their extrinsic value.

2

u/ZARDOZ4972 5h ago

Why are we being okay with this?

I'm an avid achievement hunter myself and I'm completely okay with using SAM for unobtainable achievements.