Do You Strive For Gamerscore Completion?

An interesting feature over at Gamasutra looks at the percentage of players who actually achieve a perfect Gamerscore in popular Xbox Live titles. Do you play until the last point is awarded?

Gamasutra acquired data on the top 13 Xbox Live Games for 2008 from Microsoft Game Studios user research expert Bruce Phillips, which he gathered to explore the problem of why people stop playing games. The data was culled from a selection of 14,000 Xbox Live players, and the list of games are generally those that attract the more hardcore crowd. If that is the case, then why are more than 50 per cent of them stopping play before earning all of their Gamerscore points?

As far as MGS is concerned, this is a serious issue. Players are quitting the game without striving to explore everything. Another chart in the article tracks games that dole out achievements for simply finishing the single-player game, and the numbers are much higher for most titles, but again that speaks volumes. Players are playing through a game without exploring or attempting to achieve more. It could be an issue of frustration, boredom, distraction or just plain laziness.

You can read more on the data by following the link below. What I want to know is, how many of you actually go out of your way to score achievement points?

Xbox Live Gamerscore, Completion Stats Show Major Trends [Gamasutra]


Comments

    I must be honest, Ifa game is released on PC with games for windows live acheivments, IT might sway me to purchase. I enjoy having the added incentive of the gamerscore and acheivments, being able to compare what your mates have done in the game too. I have out scored plenty of my 360 buddies in gamerscore and they have hundreds of games to choose from. |Games for Windows Lve has like 10. Gives the game another layer of replayability

    I've finished 1 game 100%. Personally I don't see the point. Play the game to have fun, and once you've had enough move onto another game. If there was a better reward than just a bigger number next to your name, for instance something ingame, then I might play these games more. I do need to pick up Fable II again though and get to the end.

    I like getting achievements, but it's not the main focus of playing... it's like a bonus. If I really enjoy playing a game, I might replay it to get more of the achievements, but if I've played through the single player game, and have been satisfied with that one play-through, I probably wouldn't play it some more just for achievements.

    Also, sometimes I'll look at the requirements for some achievements, and just think that they're so out there, I wouldn't have any chance to get them, so I don't even bother trying.

    For the record, out of something like 80 games played on my profile, I've only scored the full 1000 point on 1 single game! Actually, my G/F did it, it was on a CSI game.. Hard Evidence or something? Easiest 1000 points ever! haha.

    I use GamerScore as a means to track what I've done with a game, not as an ends to itself. As far as getting 100% completion in a game, there's two big blocks to my wanting to do that.

    One, getting full, 100% completion often goes far beyond 'playing the game' and into the realms of 'playing the game several times, on every difficulty level, and scouring every inch of it for hidden stuff'. To some people that may be entertaining. Unless the game makes that entertaining, I don't see a reason to do it, and all too often it becomes mindless busywork to artificially extend the life of the game.

    Two, unless finding the game's secrets and tidbits is rewarding in and of itself, then all you get for the gameplay grinding that's often required for 100% completion is a higher gamerscore. And you're never going to have the highest gamerscore. That accolade will go to the unemployed super gamer with more time, skills and dedication than you. Even if you do get the highest score, what then? There is no real benefit other than bragging rights, which is of limited actual worth.

    Those are your two main problems with people striving for completion. Some of this is offset by awarding new avatar stuff along with certain achievements, which is certainly a nice idea, but mostly getting 'full completion' of a game requires too great a time input for too little fun and too little reward.

    If people genuinely want to increase their game's longevity, it needs to be with real, entertaining content, not a call to keep grinding for no actual pay-off.

    I think if they're only counting games that people have scored 100% on, then that's a little silly.. I'll play a game a little extra for a few more gamerscore points, but on occasion there will be a few achievements that are either ridiculously hard or frustrating to get, so while the system I think does work on a lot of people, just counting 100% isn't getting the big picture.

    Some of my games I have played several more hours to get achievement points, but left it at around the 900 point mark, so those wouldn't count in their totals..

    I totally agree with Luke. Mass Effect had it right, get an achievement, get a bonus in game. It's not enough to just have number to show your friends how much better you are then them. at least not for me.

    Yeah. The Gamerscore (trophies, what ever) don't mean a lot to me. I play a game for enjoyment. If the game was fun enough, i'll start again after completing it. Not right away. I'll play somthing else and go back to game later. But not to increase my Gamerscore.

    Any one see a theme here? Seems we don't need a Gamerscore, just games that are fun to play.

      I dunno about that, it's good to have a record of your accomplishments at least.
      But having rewards would give incentive to try for more and harder achievements.

    I'm a fan of the 100% completion, it's awesome when tied to ingame rewards, something inside me like to see the 100% complete thing though.

    Admittedly, there comes a point where I'll stop, Yoshi's Island DS I 100%'ed all the main levels but stopped once I'd gotten 90% in the bonus levels.

    More recently Batman Arkham Asylum the goal of doing all batmans moves in a single combo, still haunts me.

    I think achievements should be things you can realistically achieve whilst playing, not have to grind through for hours to obtain.

    I never go after all the achievements/trophies because, to be frnak, most of the achievements are dumb.

    Take GTA IV - spend 12 hours cross referencing a web site so I can shoot 200 hidden pigeons. How the f*** would anyone find that enjoyable?

      Hm, on closer inspection it seems that example is not an actual achievement, but my point still stands.

      Take this achievement for GTA IV - "Come first in 20 different ranked standard multiplayer races" .... errr, no.

      I'll play one multiplayer race, if I enjoy it I'll play more. I won't play 20 just so I can get your crappy gamerscore points.

        Its even worse than that, you have to come first for each TYPE and multiplayer race.

    personally i do like to get achievements and trophies. but, i wont go out of my way to get them. the most annoying ones are the "complete the game on each difficulty" trophies. a lot of games will bore me before i even finish the game let alone finish it 3-4 times!! the games i do finish i will only get trophies/achievements that are acquired through normal game play. i have not got 1, 100% yet and doubt i ever will. if there was something worthwhile in it for me after getting the 100% then i'd probably strive for it. maybe unlock a free psn game or xbla game. nothing huge just something cheap. but it would have to be different for each game too. you couldnt do what they have with qore and offer HV bowling every month! maybe even put a credit into your acct ~5-$10 or ms points equivalent.

    Little Rocket Man, from Half-Life 2.

    Send the garden gnome into space..

    You had to carry the gnome through the entire game, dropping him every time you needed to shoot, solve a puzzle, use something.

    No thanks, lol.

    At least it's not the most frustrating achievement out there. I play games for fun, I'm not wandering around aimlessly looking for secret packages or shooting pigeons.

    Don't get why it would be an issue for Microsoft. A player who plays half a game, walks away, and buys a second game, is twice as profitable to the industry as one who spends the same period of time finishing off a single game, assuming both players are satisfied with their experience and DLC/subscriptions aren't an issue.

    I would have thought Microsoft would have been trying to increase the satisfaction rate on low-content games rather than prolong the experience of high-content ones.

    They should tie achievements to rewards - ie, now that you have avatars, completing achivements unlocks items for your avatar. Or, for every 5000 gamerscore, you get 500 microsoft points or something. Or even, 500 points to spend on updates only for that game, to prevent people just hiring craploads of games to get free points.

    It's got more to do with there being too many crap achievements than anything else I think.

    I can only tell you why I think most people Stop playing before getting every achievement. Its simply too frustrating most of the time. Just finishing the SP PLAYER Game on normal or easy is good enough for most. And playing another 20 hours on hard difficulty is asking too much from most including myself. I Really try to finish single player campaigns and whatever I pick up in gamerscore is good enough.

Join the discussion!