Rocketeer and Survivalist Achievements

[Tito]

Rocketeer
Finish the game in under 4 hours on your first playthrough.

Survivalist
Survive the game without dying on your first playthrough.


So, if the first time i'm playing, i die, or i take more than four hours, i will never be able to get those achievements? lol

[PaulTheMerc]

Yeah, I looked at that and was like...that sounds like poor decisions. Reflects poorly on the game

[Moltavis]

I sincerely hope this counts on a per save basis. All else would be stupid...

[Ch0plol]

Steam Achievement Manager

[Sp@wned]

Dear Developper,

Rocketeer
Finish the game in under 4 hours on your first playthrough.

Survivalist
Survive the game without dying on your first playthrough.

Please remove these "on your first playthrough" it isn t please us and cannot and never finish it when we didn t see at first time all succes before play ...
Let give us possible finish them...

thanks

[kaay]

meh, yeah poor choice, but do we players care so much about these silly achievements?
seriously though, the way they are now would be only worth it if they gave me real money or something really good....finish the game in under 4 hrs or never die on a playthrough....not for mere mortals like me

[Lifeless Worlds]

I definitely agree they need tweaked, but will be a little bit before I can with more pressing things at hand. I did mention this in the faq thread and about how to reset your saves so you can try for mutually-exclusive achievements. But again, yes this is something I expect to tweak at some point in the near future.

[rmz]

These two struck me as a bad decision too. First time you usually play the game the way you want to play, your own pace. If you want achievements you can go for another playthrough. Just remove that 'on the first playthrough' part and you're good to go.

[spoodie]

I managed to get the Rocketeer achievement, but my play time says 5+ hours. I'm pretty sure I didn't spend over an hour paused or just with the launcher open.

[Cronyx]

What's wrong with rewarding players with some recognition who are able to perform that feat? Would you complain if he added two more achievements that didn't have the "first playthrough" condition, but kept these as well?

[rmz]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Cronyx:

What's wrong with rewarding players with some recognition who are able to perform that feat? Would you complain if he added two more achievements that didn't have the "first playthrough" condition, but kept these as well?

I will probably buy the game regardless whether this gets changed or not, but I still think it's a bad design to include such achievements. Rewarding players for some feats? Sure. Rewards that you have only one chance of getting? No. Now, if you want to get these achievements you have to do two things, rush and prepare for whatever kills you. To achieve both it's just best to watch some youtube walkthrough and then follow in the footsteps of whoever is playing. That's not really fun. What if you encounter a bug? No achievemnt ever because the game crashed on you. Not very encouraging.

Now, if you could get that achievements on a subsequent playthrough. Completely different thing. It is still a feat, but you can play once just like you want, dying on every step. Or not. Just enjoy the game. And concentrate on the achievement hunting later.

Just thinking out loud here. It's not like I will or won't buy a game based on achievements.

[Tito]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Cronyx:

What's wrong with rewarding players with some recognition who are able to perform that feat? Would you complain if he added two more achievements that didn't have the "first playthrough" condition, but kept these as well?

I didn't complain about it.
The purpose of this thread was just to clarify if that was really the case, because it is an unusual thing.

[Cronyx]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von rmz:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Cronyx:

What's wrong with rewarding players with some recognition who are able to perform that feat? Would you complain if he added two more achievements that didn't have the "first playthrough" condition, but kept these as well?

I will probably buy the game regardless whether this gets changed or not, but I still think it's a bad design to include such achievements. Rewarding players for some feats? Sure. Rewards that you have only one chance of getting? No. Now, if you want to get these achievements you have to do two things, rush and prepare for whatever kills you. To achieve both it's just best to watch some youtube walkthrough and then follow in the footsteps of whoever is playing. That's not really fun. What if you encounter a bug? No achievemnt ever because the game crashed on you. Not very encouraging.

Now, if you could get that achievements on a subsequent playthrough. Completely different thing. It is still a feat, but you can play once just like you want, dying on every step. Or not. Just enjoy the game. And concentrate on the achievement hunting later.

Just thinking out loud here. It's not like I will or won't buy a game based on achievements.

Explain how the two scenarios -- the achievement existing, and not existing -- are *functionally* different if you don't personally have that achievement in either scenario. There is none. Other than someone else gets to have something that you don't get to have. Even if the Steam Achievement System didn't recognize beating a game without dying on your first play through in any particular game, there will be some gamers who acomplish this. It is still an "achievement" in the literal sense of the word to have done this, and some will have in a large enough sample group. The only complaint seems to be officially recognizing that it has taken place.

[srangara]

Technically, Steam now tracks--and can display on your profile page--not only the number of achievements you have, but the percentage completion rate of all your games. For those of us who care about such things, the existence of an achievement that cannot be completed lowers the average completion of our entire library, and keeps us from getting another Perfect Game.

Functionally, as rmz described, the existence of the achievements in their current form affects the way players (who want the achievement) might choose to play the game their first time. That completely changes the inital approach to solving it, in a way that no other achievement ever has.

This wouldn't be a problem in any old sandbox game, but this one has a story. Following a walkthrough ruins the story. Rushing through a game reduces your appreciation for the story. Finishing a story once removes much, if not all, of the mystery when you go back to more fully explore (and to collect the rest of the achievements).

[Lifeless Worlds]

Hi guys, as mentioned before I realize there are bugs in the achievements and I hope to fix soon. And not just bugs but not the best wording. I'll improve these. In the meantime, remember you can easily clear your save game file and play the game again and even get the "first playthrough" achievements... this is explained in the day one faq, pinned in this forum. Thanks again, everyone for your truly kind patience while I deal with E3 and game launch the same week. Again, nearly everybody has been very understanding and patience and I'm really grateful. =)

[Lifeless Worlds]

Um "not the best wording" I meant to say "not the best requirements"... tired...