Achievements?!

[Salzi]

+1 for Achievements.
Would buy instant.
No explanation "why the dev don't want Achievements" needed.

[TotalAbyss]

could use achievements yes, but that didnt stop me from buying it bnefore the two dlcs came out and enjoying it alot.

[VoiD]

would be fun to have them, even if they were locked behind vanilla ironman or something like paradox games

[Gnillek]

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2288125657

[ZS Maeklos]

The only issue I see with achievements is that Rimworld's made to essentially be modded. Sure, you can play it vanilla, but Tynan and co. always do their best to make sure that modders can do whatever they want with the game.

So, for achievements to be valid, it'd probably necessitate playing a pure vanilla game with no mods at all, and possibly even in Ironman mode.

[Salzi]

Thx for the constructive comments so far. :)

[Fyredrakon]

It's hard to make achievements meaningful. Most of the time dev mode can be enabled in game even if you choose to permanently disable it. Mods can make the game easier and thus achievements are less of achievements for some people.
Overall the game is story driven, so telling someone to go and get an achievement may get in the way of their good story. If we take an achievement for launching the ship for example, someone who doesn't plan on launching a ship in their story might feel pressured into getting the achievement. Which is not the intent of the game. What I think could make meaningful achievements are things like crafting a legendary item, trading $X amount of stuff, basically anything unambiguous that can be done modded or not.

[Sawedoffsob ™]

make it so where that if dev mode is enabled and if mods are enabled you can't get achievements.

[Slye_Fox]

Tynan said no to achievements.

[schnappkatze]

To be clear, you don't want to play it if it doesn't have achievements?

[Salzi]

Yes, i'm a achievement w**re. :)
Don't know why but it gives me something.

[Beetle]

i also like achievements. they are like extra goals to go for

[Jigain]

Originally posted by Beetle:

i also like achievements. they are like extra goals to go for

Which is exactly why Tynan doesn't want them in his game. He doesn't want something arbitrary to influence how you play the game. Play the game how YOU want, not how some arbitrary checklist tells you to.

[Salzi]

Originally posted by Jigain:

Originally posted by Beetle:

i also like achievements. they are like extra goals to go for

Which is exactly why Tynan doesn't want them in his game. He doesn't want something arbitrary to influence how you play the game. Play the game how YOU want, not how some arbitrary checklist tells you to.

But this influences me to not play the game at all. :)

[Maelos]

Originally posted by Jigain:

Originally posted by Beetle:

i also like achievements. they are like extra goals to go for

Which is exactly why Tynan doesn't want them in his game. He doesn't want something arbitrary to influence how you play the game. Play the game how YOU want, not how some arbitrary checklist tells you to.

That seems like the weakest, most useless excuse I've ever heard. It literally wouldn't change the playstyle of 99% of the playerbase in 99% of their playthroughs. At most if you really wanted to you could do one or two 'achievements runs', but if people don't wanna play for achievements, they won't... Does Tynan believe that we're dogs incapable of doing anything other than mindlessly running after treats/achievements?
(not trying to be offensive, it just honestly seems like the worst excuse I've ever read)

[Jigain]

Originally posted by Salzi:

Originally posted by Jigain:

Which is exactly why Tynan doesn't want them in his game. He doesn't want something arbitrary to influence how you play the game. Play the game how YOU want, not how some arbitrary checklist tells you to.

But this influences me to not play the game at all. :)

If you're the kind of person who cannot enjoy a game without a checklist of things to do, you wouldn't have enjoyed playing Rimworld anyway and as such the lack of achievements just saved you from buying a game you would dislike. :)

Originally posted by Maelos:

Originally posted by Jigain:

Which is exactly why Tynan doesn't want them in his game. He doesn't want something arbitrary to influence how you play the game. Play the game how YOU want, not how some arbitrary checklist tells you to.

That seems like the weakest, most useless excuse I've ever heard. It literally wouldn't change the playstyle of 99% of the playerbase in 99% of their playthroughs. At most if you really wanted to you could do one or two 'achievements runs', but if people don't wanna play for achievements, they won't... Does Tynan believe that we're dogs incapable of doing anything other than mindlessly running after treats/achievements?
(not trying to be offensive, it just honestly seems like the worst excuse I've ever read)

Self-applied statistics mean little. Remember, a study shows that two thirds of Americans believe they are above average in terms of intelligence compared to other Americans.

That said, you're arguing with the wrong person. I'm not Tynan, I didn't decide his policy, I'm just repeating it. Although I do understand his point of view. While I'm sure there are some few people who wouldn't let achievements influence their playstyle in any way, and you may possibly even be one of them (although if you were there would be no reason you'd advocate for them in the first place), the truth is that the vast majority of people would alter, in minor or major ways, their playstyle in order to obtain achievements. I'm not above admitting that in games with achievements, I tend to go out of my way to get them, even (and especially) if I'm required to deviate from what I find is a fun way to play the game. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, it can sometimes lead to new ways of playing the game that the player may find just as enjoyable if not more so (such as trying out a pacifist route, for example), but they can equally just be frustrating messes (like spending literal days perfecting playing a single frustrating mini-game in order to get the achievement for finishing all stages of it without getting hit once - I'm looking at you, Fector's Challenge). The point is, if Rimworld had an achievement for something like "have 20 pawns high on smokeleaf at the same time", chances are very good you'd try o go out of your way to do that, even if you don't even like smokeleaf to begin with. You're literally jumping through hoops to play the game in a way you don't like in order to get a shot of that sweet, sweet achievement dopamine. If that achievement doesn't exist, you'll only go out of your way to get pawns stoned on smokeleaf if that's what you actually want to do.

So yeah. I can completely understand why Tynan is taking the stance he's taking in regards to achievements. If you want to argue that with him, then take it to him. Game's got an official forum, and Tynan has an official Twitter. He's not going to read this.