Is anyone else sick and tired of unlockable content in games?

[Servo]

Hermiod is right.

Are you serious, or what? Did you miss the point, or just ignore it?

It's all subjective, that's the point. Arrqh already said that. I wouldn't tell anyone that they hadn't completed the game just by finishing one playthrough. I'd simply say that I personally wouldn't consider it complete until there was nothing left to do.

 

[Arrqh]

Hermiod is right. Completing a game just means finishing the story or main quest. If someone played Super Mario Galaxy and beat Bowser, but didn't get all 120 (or 121) stars, are you going to tell them they never finished the game?

No, he isn't right. Completing a game from an objective perspective means finishing whatever criteria the developers have put in the game to determine completeness. Some games don't even have stories or "main quests." You can twist around whatever definitions you want but if I finish a runthrough of a Metroid game and it has a 54% listed next to my save, you cannot say that I have fully completed it because objectively I clearly haven't.

Completing a game from a subjective perspective means finishing whatever criteria you have decided for yourself matter. In which case he still isn't right because his personal criteria has absolutely no bearing on what anyone else wants to be doing.

 

[Hermiod]

I stated my opinion, backed it up with reasons and answered questions about those opinions when asked.

No you didn't. You told me that completing a game meant finishing the story, not completing the game 100%. I quoted that opinion, and countered it, and you didn't even respond to it.

As has been mentioned on a number of occasions; not all games have storylines. How does something like Flower, or Wipeout HD figure into your reasoning here?

^I didn't tell anybody anything.

Erm...

"Completing" a game doesn't mean getting 100%, it means reaching the conclusion of the game's story.

Sure seems like you were telling me a fact, rather than stating an opinion, there.

So, basically, I did what everyone else did in every single other post in this thread and you really do think I, and only I, should preface everything I say with a disclaimer.

 

[Servo]

So, basically, I did what everyone else did in every single other post in this thread and you really do think I, and only I, should preface everything I say with a disclaimer.

Ok, let's not get our tighty whiteys in a bunch over this.

I couldn't care less what "everyone else" did. You were specifically addressing me with your comment, so I replied to it. I really don't care if you start, or end, every post with a disclaimer, but you might want to look at how your posts read to others, in order to avoid confusion. The post in question reads like you're making a statement of fact. I'm not a mind reader, so I take posts at face value. That's the nature of the internet. Be clearer, or don't be surprised when people pull you on your comments.

 

[Rett Mikhal]

I see what everyone is saying that no definition is the clear cut definition...

But I have to side with Hermiod that it isn't fair to cheat someone out of saying they completed the game because they didn't 'do everything'.

Let me put this into a nice, clean, possibly colorful, metaphor.

I, Rett Mikhal, buy a car for 10,000. It's the standard model, A/C, radio, no sunroof or hatchback because I don't have a need for them. I'm happy with that.

Hermoid buys the same model but without the A/C, for 9,000. He doesn't need it and thinks they're wasteful. That's fine, it's still the same experience driving, right?

Guy C, who is much more well off, buys the deluxe model, 50,000, that comes with everything. A/C, radio, sunroof, hatchback, GPS, computer voice command, auto parallel parking.

Since Hermoid and I don't have enough money to buy the deluxe model, we have to deal without those features. But, as stated, we're OK with that. The car runs the same. All three people drive the car feeling like they have the best model car.

Flash forward 10 years. It's time for an upgrade.

Again, I pay 10,000, Hermoid pays 9,000, and Guy C pays 50,000. This time, however, Hermoid and I get cheated. Not only are the more advanced features missing, our engines are underpowered, and our gas mileage is shot. Our cars barely run, even though they're the same car just with different amounts of capital invested into it.

That's not fair. Everyone should get the same base product no matter what. If you can legally drive the car, it should drive.

If you can complete the game, it should be the real ending and all the other stuff should just be for fun. Having to do extra things that some gamers don't have the time or patience for to get the best experience isn't fair. If it's to unlock Easter Eggs like seeing Samus in less clothes (like THAT's a challenge, anymore...), fine, but don't cheap us out of the game.

Some games even cut off the last part of the game until you get it ALL DONE! Like Bomberman 64, to name one off the top of my head. Screw the Gold Cards, Bomberman bombs things first, collects things last.

I'll have to quote the internet on this one.

YO DAWG, I HEARD YOU LIKE PLAYING THIS GAME, SO WE'RE MAKING YOU PLAY THE GAME FORE YOU CAN PLAY THE GAME. NOW YOU CAN PLAY BEFORE YOU PLAY!

 

[Yoda]

Driving cars is great! But uhh, I have absolutely no clue what the hell point you were trying to make with that metaphor though... Is paying more for your car supposed to be analogous to trying to 100% a game?

 

[Arrqh]

But I have to side with Hermiod that it isn't fair to cheat someone out of saying they completed the game because they didn't 'do everything'.

If you complete half a game and are happy with that, how are you being "cheated" when someone correctly points out that you didn't bother with the other half?

On the other hand, if you dislike games with unlockable content the solution is simple: don't play those games and leave them for the people who do. Desiring that all games fit into a mold so you can enjoy all of them is ridiculous. I don't like sports games so I just don't play them, I don't go around complaining that developers should alter sports games to be RPG's.

 

[darthraidr]

there are somethings i think work well when locked. i bought SF4 and was very sad to learn that i had to unlock all the extra characters by playing though with the other characters.

now, i would be fine if it meant i could just keep re-using 1 character to unlock them all. but i dont want to have to play as zangief or dhalsim to unlock a guy. so as it stands, i have only unlocked sakura and dan. i dont plan on unlocking anyone else, it's not worth my time. so in that sense, i am done with SF4.

gating player progress is tough to design. do you let players get everything at once (knowing that some may play the game so much that it posses a hazzard)? is it okay to stagger somethings out, knowing that some players will only be able to play the game at certain times and end up missing out on all the rewards?

it's not easy, and there is no one right answer. it's all situational. it's also, in terms of achievement design, relatively new ground. i'd like to think achievement design is improving.

 

[Servo]

Let me put this into a nice, clean, possibly colorful, metaphor.

I, Rett Mikhal, buy a car for 10,000. It's the standard model, A/C, radio, no sunroof or hatchback because I don't have a need for them. I'm happy with that.

Hermoid buys the same model but without the A/C, for 9,000. He doesn't need it and thinks they're wasteful. That's fine, it's still the same experience driving, right?

Guy C, who is much more well off, buys the deluxe model, 50,000, that comes with everything. A/C, radio, sunroof, hatchback, GPS, computer voice command, auto parallel parking.

Since Hermoid and I don't have enough money to buy the deluxe model, we have to deal without those features. But, as stated, we're OK with that. The car runs the same. All three people drive the car feeling like they have the best model car.

Flash forward 10 years. It's time for an upgrade.

Again, I pay 10,000, Hermoid pays 9,000, and Guy C pays 50,000. This time, however, Hermoid and I get cheated. Not only are the more advanced features missing, our engines are underpowered, and our gas mileage is shot. Our cars barely run, even though they're the same car just with different amounts of capital invested into it.

That's not fair. Everyone should get the same base product no matter what. If you can legally drive the car, it should drive.

Are you on drugs? If you are, then you should probably stop, but if you're not, then you should probably start.

A better (and less confusing) analogy would be this; Hermiod and I both spend the same amount of money on a car, except he only uses half the car because that's all he wants to be bothered with, wheras I use the full car, because I want to get everything I possibly can out of the experience.

Q: Which one of us is correct?
A: Both of us.

 

[FordSVT]

What's the real incentive to play a game like Forza for an extended period of time if every track, car, and part is available to use from square one?

I thought the incentive was the fun involved in driving really fast cars that you can customise to your heart's content on complex and challenging tracks?

I'm also entertained by the sense of accomplishment I get when I open a new track or get a new car in the garage, why take that away from me? Forza has an arcade-mode with most of the basic cars and tracks, that should be enough for casual people who only want to play for ten minutes at a time.

 

[Rett Mikhal]

Whoops. This post is a mistake of Firefox. Please see below post.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

There should be a law against car analogies.

 

[Rett Mikhal]

Driving cars is great! But uhh, I have absolutely no clue what the hell point you were trying to make with that metaphor though... Is paying more for your car supposed to be analogous to trying to 100% a game?

Are you on drugs? If you are, then you should probably stop, but if you're not, then you should probably start.

A better (and less confusing) analogy would be this; Hermiod and I both spend the same amount of money on a car, except he only uses half the car because that's all he wants to be bothered with, whereas I use the full car, because I want to get everything I possibly can out of the experience.

Turn "dollars spent" into "time spent". Time IS money, anyway. Being able to drive the car is analogous to being able to beat the game, and the car being able to drive functionally is analogous to the game giving you everything and ending properly. Seems obvious to me, but I speak in metaphor often.

If you complete half a game and are happy with that, how are you being "cheated" when someone correctly points out that you didn't bother with the other half?

I feel cheated when games withhold the story unless you do something extra, especially when the story REALLY changes because you beat it on difficult or something stupid like that. It seems so childish to withhold information like that. I'm a gamer who plays 90% for the sake of a good storyline with interesting characters, so it really bothers me that there's something there I missed out on. What bothers me most is no other medium does this. When I read a book I've completed the story the same as everyone else and nothing is kept from me.

There should be a law against car analogies.

If I could never mention the word 'car' again in my life, I would, because there's no mechanical thing I hate more in this world. But, you have to know your audience. Everyone understands cars.

I'm also entertained by the sense of accomplishment I get when I open a new track or get a new car in the garage, why take that away from me? Forza has an arcade-mode with most of the basic cars and tracks, that should be enough for casual people who only want to play for ten minutes at a time.

I wouldn't want to take that away from you, but I'd like an option to skip it. I mentioned the F-zero code that skipped it, all games should have that. If you don't want to use it, that's fine, but if I don't want to unlock stuff, I'll use it. That seems fair, and that's been my whole argument that catering to one side or the other isn't fair. All games need to ride that middle ground. The only reason they cater to the side that likes unlocking things is so they can tack on 10 hours to the average gameplay time.

I've probably logged 1,000 hours into Nethack because it's an amazingly addictive and challenging game. There's nothing to unlock except the ending of the game, so gimmicks like that aren't necessary, just lazy band aids.

Sadly, it seems the days of offering codes for free content are at an end. Now it is, as another poster mentioned, mostly downloadable content you must pay for. How cruel an industry gaming has turned into.

 

[Servo]

Seems obvious to me, but I speak in metaphor often.

Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra.

 

[Arrqh]

I feel cheated when games withhold the story unless you do something extra, especially when the story REALLY changes because you beat it on difficult or something stupid like that. It seems so childish to withhold information like that. I'm a gamer who plays 90% for the sake of a good storyline with interesting characters, so it really bothers me that there's something there I missed out on. What bothers me most is no other medium does this. When I read a book I've completed the story the same as everyone else and nothing is kept from me.

No other medium is interactive, so of course no other medium requires you to interact with it to do stuff.

In any case, the solution is still simple, as I already said in the part of my post that you didn't bother to quote. If you don't like games that do this then play other games. There are a wide variety of games for a wide variety of tastes, and it's ridiculous for you to expect that all games should cater to you when there are people who enjoy other things.

 

[TheBrew]

Seems obvious to me, but I speak in metaphor often.

Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra.

Reported for trolling.

 

[Servo]

Seems obvious to me, but I speak in metaphor often.

Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra.

Reported for trolling.

Shaka, when the walls fell.

 

[Kaziarl]

Unlockable content doesn't bother me. I actually enjoy it in most cases. Multi-player achievement are kind of annoying, since I can't play multi-player with subscribing to the xbox live stuff.

The way I look at it, "Unlockable" content has always been part of video games. You have to unlock many characters in Mortal Kombat, you have to unlock new ships in STO, you have to do long, and sometimes annoying side quests in most final fantasy games to get the best weapons and gear. The achievements don't seem any different to me.

 

[Rett Mikhal]

Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra.

Reported for trolling.

Shaka, when the walls fell.

Now that made me laugh.

No other medium is interactive, so of course no other medium requires you to interact with it to do stuff.

In any case, the solution is still simple, as I already said in the part of my post that you didn't bother to quote. If you don't like games that do this then play other games. There are a wide variety of games for a wide variety of tastes, and it's ridiculous for you to expect that all games should cater to you when there are people who enjoy other things.

Well, see that's not always an option. I like the Metroid series because I like the character of Samus. The whole raised by ancient warriors thing is interesting, and I like the evolution of the character.

The first two or three Metroid games were reasonable. Just beat the game in under 3 hours. Difficult, but not too difficult, and it focused more on you completing the story than getting every single thing in the game. Not too far on either side of the fence at all, in fact. Besides it just let you see Samus with less clothes at the end, no matter what you beat the game.

But with the modern ones, like Prime and her sequels, or Fusion, the limits were made extreme! Scanning everything (EVERYTHING) in Metroid Prime was such a chore. All they told us was that it would reveal more plot, but in reality all it did was give a teaser for the sequel. I chored through that til about 60% before I finally just beat it and lived with the knowledge I'd never see it.

Metroid Fusion was even more sadistic. It actually did give away more of the plot, at least that's what I recall reading on GameFaqs. I recall because it was bloody impossible. 100% completion in under 2 hours. That means beating every boss, exploring every room, getting every missile/bomb/weapon/energy tank and upgrade and getting to the end in under two hours. It took me longer than two hours to complete the game without any unnecessary exploration, it just seems an impossible task.

So, after that, I called it quits on the Metroid series because of unrealistic and unnecessary padding techniques like that.

What was wrong with just unlocking new suits or more of the artwork? That was interesting and fun, I have to admit, probably because they had realistic limits.

 

[Arrqh]

Well, see that's not always an option.

It's not always an option to not play a game that you're not going to like?

But with the modern ones, like Prime and her sequels, or Fusion, the limits were made extreme! Scanning everything (EVERYTHING) in Metroid Prime was such a chore. All they told us was that it would reveal more plot, but in reality all it did was give a teaser for the sequel. I chored through that til about 60% before I finally just beat it and lived with the knowledge I'd never see it.

Yes, at the end of Prime you get a short, few second long teaser for the next game. Your point is defeating itself, you don't lose out on anything siginificant story wise if you don't finish it to 100%. Metroid is actually a great example, because it's an inherent part of the forumla to have a percentage counter and to give little extras to people who unlock everything. How could you not expect that with Prime?

Fusion equally does not give you any real story information for different completeness. It does give you different images of Samus depending on your completeness levels, same as all the other Metroid games. So forgive me if I have no sympathy for you, because you seem completely ill informed on the actual games you're playing. The entire point of unlockables in Metroid is exactly what you are asking for... little extra things that have no real bearing on story as rewards for spending the time to unlock everything. By not doing it you have not been cheated out of anything, other then being unable to continue having a misplaced sense of entitlement. If you really want to see an ending to a Metroid game that badly, look it up on Youtube. But don't complain that the game is using the classic mechanics of the series... you knew what you were getting in to when you bought it, and if you didn't then you should have paid more attention before hand.

EDIT: And to back the point up, here are the different endings to Fusion:

Credits will roll and after the credits it will show Samus on her armor, she will start to shine and if you beat the game in UNDER 2 hours it will show Samus posing in a tank top and a tight short and it will show the time you took and the percentage of the items collected.
If you beat the game between 2 and 4 hours it will show Samus posing with her suit on but without the helmet.
If you beat the game in OVER 4 hours it will show Samus posing with her suit on only.
If you beat the game in UNDER 2 hours but with 100% rate, it will show Samus posing with the same half naked clothes but in a different pose and a transparent picture of her is shown in the background.
If you beat the game in OVER 2 hours but with 100% rate it will show Samus half naked again but in yet another different pose.

Do you seriously believe you're being "cheated" because you don't get to see a half naked picture of Samus? Really?