Beside Reloaded, Wet dreams don't dry and Wet dreams dry twice those games are from a time where Achievements did not exist...

For Steam they add just very easy general stuff because Valve wants games to have Achievements.
On GoG you will simply get a game how it was done back then.
That means no Achievements at all.

Don't need achievements to track such data.

Gameplay wise, especially multiplayer, it can make games worse as people will skip normal gameplay to chase an achievement, screwing everyone else over.


That and like mentioned above, if a primarily Single player game has multiplayer achievements, it then stops you getting a "completed" set if the multiplayer portion either sucks or is just dead.


They have gone too far with it because of no-lifers who feel ingame achievements add something to their meagre existance.

No they don't.

The reason most people don't beat the game on Hard is because:

1) most people don't spend the time to beat most of their games, period, because they have giant backlogs of games, most of which they will never have time to get around to playing much, if ever at all

and

2) most people who do play a game in the first place choose the default/normal difficulty, and they do not ever bother to play on Hard in the first place.

But if they did choose to play on Hard, and if they also did to choose to take the time to beat the game, then chances are, they would be able to do so in many or most cases.

In other words, an Achievement having a low percentage of completion on a Hard difficulty has nothing whatsoever to do with players being "unable" to earn that Achievement, and it provides zero indication whatsoever of players' supposed inability to earn it.

Not really, overall maybe a handful of older, non-remastered games got achievements. And I doubt Valve cares about that at all (they didn't even make them for Half-Life), but buyers do and some developers could because it seems like quite important factor of attractiveness for many players.


BTW for OP: all these Leisure Suit Larry 1-7 games are on Steam, just not in a single package. And no, they don't have achievements there either.

Agreed.

While I see your point, I think it is too dismissive of how achievements can provide some insight into difficulty.

1) this is accounted for by comparing the relative completion percentages. If 50% completed on normal vs 30% on hard, then its not too difficult to assume that 60% of players who beat the game can beat the game on hard difficulty. To just say only 3% completed on this game on hard is the wrong takeaway but if you see that 60% beat the game but only 3% on hard (or some hard challenge in the game), maybe there is an unexpectedly big difficulty spike there. Is that intended and ok or should the devs consider rethinking for their sequel?

2) And yet there are games with multiple difficulties where achievements result in a normal distribution (more people beat the game on normal vs hard vs very hard) despite the fact that these difficulties are available from the beginning.

In KH1, 7.1% of players got the trophy for Proud (hard) vs 26% for normal vs 31% for beginner (easy).
Re:COM, 6% hard vs 17% normal vs 22% easy
KH2, 11% for very hard vs 17% for hard vs 48% for normal + beginner (no differentiation indicators here).
The Last of Us, 40% on easy, 29% on normal, 7% on hard, 2% for very hard
Uncharted 4, 39% for easy, 35% for normal, 27% for hard, 5% for very hard

If your argument is true (most players just chose normal and dont explore other difficulties), there should be no differentiation between easy and normal or hard and very hard. It should be split into more distinct categories of normal with little to no differentiation with beginner and pretty much no differentiation for harder difficulties. You can definitely argue that normal is over-represented but to say that achievements provide absolutely no insights is also wrong.