Only 37 Achievements ?

[Miriamel]

I saw in YouTube videos that there should only be 37 Steam achievements. That seems a bit too small to the old parts

[sprenkledavid]

They might add more? And there's an in-game "memento" system which unlocks stuff as your leader gains XP.

[Oaks]

That is quite low compared to the other games. Did you by chance see what the achievements are? I'm quite interested to know.

[Mountain Man]

Who cares? Achievements are pointless.

[Oaks]

Originally posted by Mountain Man:

Who cares? Achievements are pointless.

Clearly some people do. Just because you aren't interested, others might be.

[Mountain Man]

Originally posted by Oaks:

Originally posted by Mountain Man:

Who cares? Achievements are pointless.

Clearly some people do. Just because you aren't interested, others might be.

But seriously, what value do achievements add to a game to the point that people are going to complain that there are "only" three dozen?

[Oaks]

Originally posted by Mountain Man:

Originally posted by Oaks:

Clearly some people do. Just because you aren't interested, others might be.

But seriously, what value do achievements add to a game to the point that people are going to complain that there are "only" three dozen? :VSnake:

You are literally posting in a thread about people complaining it's too low. Clearly there is value.

[Mountain Man]

Originally posted by Oaks:

Originally posted by Mountain Man:

But seriously, what value do achievements add to a game to the point that people are going to complain that there are "only" three dozen?

You are literally posting in a thread about people complaining it's too low. Clearly there is value.

Of course that doesn't answer the question. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Oaks]

Originally posted by Mountain Man:

Originally posted by Oaks:

You are literally posting in a thread about people complaining it's too low. Clearly there is value.

Of course that doesn't answer the question. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Ah, it was a serious question. Some people hunt achievements and therefore achievements can add dozens of extra hours of gameplay, so there's value to them for people who enjoy them.

[katzenkrimis]

Originally posted by Miriamel:

37 Steam achievements.

That seems a bit too small to the old parts.

Under construction.

A hundred could be added with two expansions.

There were 88 added with Rise and Fall and Gathering Storm.

The smaller DLC of Civilization, Wonders, and Leaders could add a hundred, as they did in VI.

[Damian]

Bro, like what's your problem.. If you DGAF about achievments then fine, but not everyone needs to share your opinion. It's cool that some achievments are making a challenge for you like for example Pizza Party achievment in CIV6. Do you think I would come up with this BS? It's something satisfying in collecting achievments and having 100% completion. It's also cool to know, that I am for example in barely 10% people who have finished a game on Deity. There is simply something cool about achievments. If you don't feel it and will try forcefully convince us, that it's meaningless, no one will care like you don't care about achievments. like go take a dump somewhere else, toilet maybe, jeeeeesus

[Mountain Man]

Originally posted by Oaks:

Originally posted by Mountain Man:

Of course that doesn't answer the question. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Ah, it was a serious question. Some people hunt achievements and therefore achievements can add dozens of extra hours of gameplay, so there's value to them for people who enjoy them.

Okay, but 37 sounds like a lot to me, and likely some of them are going to be an utter grind to get requiring dozens of hours.

[Ellye]

I don't care for 100%'ing achievs.

But I do like achievments in a game like Civ as a checklist of stuff that I already did.

It's a good way to plan what my next match will be. I can quickly see which leaders I've already played before, which map types, which victory types, which difficulties, etc, etc.

[Sstavix]

Originally posted by Mountain Man:

Originally posted by Oaks:

Ah, it was a serious question. Some people hunt achievements and therefore achievements can add dozens of extra hours of gameplay, so there's value to them for people who enjoy them.

Okay, but 37 sounds like a lot to me, and likely some of them are going to be an utter grind to get requiring dozens of hours.

37 is a lot? I managed to get all 320 in Civ VI and it only took me 938 hours.

If the past games are any indication, they will add more achievements with each new expansion and DLC. Give it time - 37 is just a starting point.

[Lowlight]

This is incredibly disappointing. By far the lowest number at launch since Achievements were implemented in Civ 5. I wish I had seen this before I bought the game. One of many steps back on this version. Did we really wait 8+ years for this mess?