More Reviews
REVIEWS Resident Evil: Revelations Review
While 3DS gamers have been enjoying the franchise's best game in years for some time now, does the experience translate for Resident Evil fans on console?

Donkey Kong Country Returns 3D Review
Gamers have gone bananas for Nintendo's 3DS, but can this port of Retro Studios' 2010 Wii game make the jump to your portable?
More Previews
PREVIEWS The Last of Us Preview
With Naughty Dog releasing a new IP in just a few short weeks, we got hands-on one more time. But don't worry: This is a spoiler-free preview.
Release Dates
NEW RELEASES GRiD 2
Release date: 05/28/13

Fuse
Release date: 05/28/13

Remember Me
Release date: 06/04/13

The Last of Us
Release date: 06/14/13


LATEST FEATURES Being A Console Is Actually Xbox One's Worst Asset
Microsoft's newest console has lots of different features, but video games might hold the device back from the software giant's true intentions.

Everything I Learned About Call of Duty: Ghosts Last Week
I wasn't allowed to talk about the new Infinity Ward game last week when I met with Activision, and I don't have much to say now that Xbox One spilled the beans.
 
Coming Soon

LEADERBOARD
Read More Member Blogs
FEATURED VOXPOP Bras
On the future of some gamers
By Bras
Posted on 05/22/13
Before Microsoft and Sony do something regarding their future in the video game business, I wanted to write, and I've wanted it for a long time now, but other things kept getting in my way, and fearing that tomorrow might be too late, today will have to do.  ...

MEMBER BLOG

Hawk_one Hawk_one's Blog
PROFILE
Average Blog Rating:
[ Back to All Posts ]
Ridicolous notions: "100% complete"
Posted on Wednesday, July 23 2008 @ 19:52:33 Eastern

OK, so another tiny little series of articles. With this one, I will be focusing on notions in gaming that is, frankly, ridicolous, but that's not the only criteria, because if it was, I'd just put up a link to bad games. No, it has to be ridicolous, but nevertheless well-established phenomena that are quite unlikely to change as an industry standard! That should narrow things a bit down... or maybe not?

Anyway, my first ridicolous notion is a bit of a complex one. Basically, it has to do with the factor of most single-player games having dual goals these days: You can either just finish it (getting to the ending scene as soon as you can), or you can also pick up a lot of extras and complete it. And sometimes that gives you rewards in form of different/extra ending scenes and whatnot.

And the industry standard of doing this is that you have a percentage number somewhere in the menu, and that you need to get all 100% of the game's goals in order to get the bonus. It sounds sensible, doesn't it? 100%, a very easy number to remember, especially if the game shows you the progress. But the fact is, it can get pretty ridicolous when one takes a closer look.

Well, not always, of course. Getting 120 stars in Super Mario Galaxy consists of playing the main game, you just have to play the main game on more difficult stages (some slightly too difficult, and this is coming from someone who -has- all 120 stars. As Luigi.) And  Metroid Prime 3 has a pretty good implementation on how to get 100%, because here, 100% simply translates to finding all the suit upgrades, almost half of which are mandatory, and quite a few as good as mandatory (i.e. you'd be a fool to miss them). Add to that a wonderful searching system that you get a little over halfway into the game, and also the fact that you'll be using the main game abilities to get all of them. This means that the 100% mark is something that is achievable to quite a fair amount of gamers, not just the precious few "hardcore" gamers. It also means you spend less time searching for where the hell the the upgrades are, and instead more times figuring out how to get them, which I will claim is a more fun way of gaming, as that involves less frustration.

If you wonder how MP3 could have done it wrong, they could f.ex. have made it so you'd need a complete list of scanned creatures; something that is completely optional to start with. (It's a damn useful feature, to be sure, but it's still optional from the get-go.)

Anyway, it's time to show how things can absolutely get horribly wrong when you let "100% complete" get into your game in a careless manner. Enter Kingdom Hearts 2, a game with an extra ending scene that is possibly one of the coolest scenes in the entire game, despite only being a rather vague prelude to KH3. To get this scene, you must "complete" the game, and this is where things get really weird.

See, on Proud mode, this isn't at all difficult to achieve (assuming you can beat it... But the difficulty difference between Normal and Proud mode is small enough that if you can beat normal, you can beat Proud). Basically, to get a complete game, all you need is to close all the keyholes. Most are mandatory, but a few are optional, and those that are optional are not specifially difficult to do. Closing keyholes is, in fact, part of the game, and thus, it feels natural that you get something extra for doing all of them and not just some. So far, so good.

But if you play the game on Normal Mode... Poor, poor, creature. If you want that extra scene here, you must not only close all keyholes, but you must also play every single minigame, participate in all the Hades tournaments (which requires a lot of extra leveling), defeat Sephiroth, etc; and that's not all. No, in addition to this, in most of the games (and all the Hades tournaments), you must also beat a certain score that can be anything from doable to fiendishly difficult. You must, in fact, get a -real- 100% game, and achieving this is far, far more difficult than simply beating the game on Proud Mode.

And if you play through the game on easy mode, you can't even get the extra cut scene no matter what you do.

The word for this is obviously "ridicolous". The sensible approach would be to have "lock all keyholes" as the requirement for all three levels of difficulty, and anyone saying otherwise are arguing from an elitist gaming point of view. The extra cut-scene, despite being short, is part of the -experience- of the game, and to tell someone they're not allowed this experience because of someone else's preconceived notions of "worthiness" is just arrogant. Especially when "worthiness" translates to spending a hell of a lot of extra time level-grinding for optional tournaments, and playing minigames that are... Well, mostly boring, to be honest.

LEGO Star Wars: The complete Saga is another game that's taken the whole "collecting" part to a clearly ridicolous level. If you want the reward for a complete game here, you will have to go through such a long and tedious collection run that I'm getting mentally exhausted just remembering it. I mean, first you go through a level in the story mode, in which you have your characters pre-picked, and can usually only get a few of the collectible ten items. This part is fair enough. And then, if you want the rest of the ten items, you also need to go through the level in Free Play Mode (and only after having collected enough characters so that you can get to all the different parts of the level, which takes some time). And -then- you have to go through the level -again-, this time to collect ten different items, only this time with a time limit!

It sounds repetitive just on paper, and believe me, there are lots and lots more to do if you want it all, and it's all so very, very tedious collecting. I had played through roughly the first three movies in the game, and yet only amassed roughly 13% of all the collectibles. And trust me, I'd done quite a bit of the extras, I just couldn't bring myself to do all of it. The task felt completely insurmountable, and so I knew that the only thing I could do - helped by the fact that it was also a buggy and generally not that good game - was to quit it all.

Heck, even games that make an excellent point in being original and different can fall prey to the "100%" curse. At least it's usually fairly easy to track which level you need to go to spend two hours trying to find that last, hidden semi-transparent floating Figment that sometimes appear in backgrounds with similar colours... But a highly more favourable approach would be to give that extra ending scene at, say 90%. Or even 80%. Sounds insane, doesn't it?? (Of course, if it sounds insane, then it definitely belongs in Psychonauts.)

But frankly, it's what should be done. Remember, those extra bonus scenes are supposed to be rewards. But the problem is, by insisting on keeping the bar at 100% and not care an inch whether or not it's a relevant 100%, it becomes a reward for the wrong reasons. It is not a reward for exploring the game and collect an appropriate amount of extras, it is a reward for turning into an obsessive-compulsive kind of gamer, who reads up on guides and lose sight of everything but the elusive "completeness". Is that really the kind of behaviour one wants to encourage? Is it really what we want gamers to brag about (although they won't put it in those terms, of course)? I personally don't think so.

A good reward system is to be found in the Jak&Daxter games. Well, not the first one, it suffered from this curse. But the second (and third) one, now we're getting somewhere. In the second game, you get all the possible rewards you want by collecting 200 red orbs. The difference between this game and the other games I've talked about, is that the game has a total of 275 such orbs hidden around. So if getting one of them proves to be difficult - and quite a few of them are next to impossible to get - just skip it and go for another one. Hey, that's actually less than 75% of all red orbs, which means that the guys in Naughty Dog must obviously have read this article and traveled back in time to implement this radical and new principle of not needing to give up your life to get a "complete" game.

So, to summarise: If you have some neat ending rewards in your single-player games, make sure you have -reasonable- standards for getting there. This should generally only include variables found to be part of the main game. If minigames are getting included as part of the variables, then the bar for the biggest reward should lower accordingly, because for one thing, you never know if everyone will enjoy the minigames, especially if the minigame mechanics are distinctly different from the main game mechanics.
Comments
  • winempire003
    winempire003

    Joined: Jun 2007
    Posted: Jul 29th, 2008 at 5:35 pm
    I agree, the whole "get everything" mechanic is nuckin futs in Lego Star Wars:TCS. My little brother and I probably spent a total of days on this game getting to 100%. But I am a bit of a completionist and will go out and get the strat. guide. Like in Lost Odyssey, I played through the game while trying to get eveything, then saw the achievment for 100% completion. Had to do it. But some of the requirements were just silly.
  • De-Ting
    De-Ting

    Joined: Nov 2006
    Posted: Jul 29th, 2008 at 8:07 pm
    Yes, I love completing games also, and the Jak & Daxter series has been the most enjoyable. But some games I'd never be able to complete if I was being paid to play them. MGS4 is one of them. I consider myself a pretty hardcore, whip-it-good gamer, but some 100% requirements necessitate you being really obsessed with the game. Take Oblivion. If you want the 100%, you have to do some really stupid "omg my entire game is worthless now" things that make you wish game designers weren't so cold blooded.
  • Rinnon
    Rinnon

    Joined: Nov 2005
    Posted: Jul 30th, 2008 at 12:30 am
    The only thing worse than a reward that takes a billion hours to get, is when the reward is some sort of item that WOULD have been very useful and awesome during the game, but is utterly pointless now that you've gotten 100% of the game completed. I freaking hate that, you get your awesome weapon or item or something. then you turn off the game and never play it again, because you finished everything! >_
  • LinksOcarina
    LinksOcarina

    Joined: Nov 2005
    Posted: Jul 30th, 2008 at 4:49 am
    With the 360 the entire side-quest of 100% achievement points is always looming. But100% completion is for those who want it, the completest like myself. The problem it seems is that psychologically, because of achievements and just knowing that you only have 75% of the game done by the time it ends, it seems like people become obsessive over it.
  • acdibble
    acdibble

    Joined: Jul 2007
    Posted: Jul 30th, 2008 at 7:04 am
    You seem to have forgotten Grand Theft Auto. If you don't play it, in order to get 100% you must do ridiculous amounts of tasks. In GTA:III you had to collect all the hidden packages, do all of the insane stunts, collect all of the cars for the garages, and do all of the side missions. I'm not sure if that's everything, but you have to do the same for Vice City and San Andreas. But in GTA:IV they must've had a better idea because instead of hidden packages they decided to make you find those damn pidgeons. I'm not sure if you get anything after you get 100% because I've never done it, but I remember every 10 hidden packages you found they would give you a weapon at the safehouse. In GTA:IV if you got 100% you got a key to the city and an achievement. So in order to get the 1000 gamerpoints you would need to spend hours on end getting the 100%.
  • PsychoSavager
    PsychoSavager

    Joined: Mar 2007
    Posted: Jul 30th, 2008 at 3:23 pm
    When I get a game, I will always try to get 100% completion, no matter how daft the criteria is. I have three exceptions to this: Final Fantasy IX - you have to get to the last dungeon within 12 HOURS of starting the game in order to get Excalibur II, the most powerful weapon in the game. And for what? Using it against the final boss and that's it! You don't even get to take it to the next game. Vagrant Story - getting all the Titles requires literally hundreds of monotonous gameplay - using each weapon 5000 times, killing 5000 of each class of monster. And Shadow Hearts 3: Getting the Extreme Mind's Eye; requires you to have a 75% perfect hit ratio for the entire game. I rarely get above 20%
  • De-Ting
    De-Ting

    Joined: Nov 2006
    Posted: Jul 31st, 2008 at 12:10 am
    Almost forgot. Did anyone ever 100% the old Spyro games? Fun, but after you do it you're just like "wtf?"
  • PsychoSavager
    PsychoSavager

    Joined: Mar 2007
    Posted: Jul 31st, 2008 at 4:59 am
    I got the maximum percentages on the three Spyros (which weirdly was 120% for Spyro 1 and 117% for Spyro 3 I think). Getting 105% on Crash Bandicoot 3 was really hard - it meant getting very high scores on all the Time Trials.
  • Hawk_one
    Hawk_one

    Joined: Sep 2006
    Posted: Jul 31st, 2008 at 1:12 pm
    If I forgot GTA (or any other game with more extreme collect mechanics than my own examples), it's most likely because I've never played those. That is, I played the original GTA (the 2D pixel game, that is) wayyyyy back when, and that game only had secrets that you'd like. Like, armour, and machine guns, etc. In any case, I aknowledge all your examples, folks.
  • Hawk_one
    Hawk_one

    Joined: Sep 2006
    Posted: Jul 31st, 2008 at 1:29 pm
    And Links, I know too damn well what it's like to be a completionist, and that there are those of us who will make a "complete" game no matter what. Hey, I recently made an FF X cluster of saves where I amongst other things made sure to get every single Overdrive Charge variable as soon as technically possible. Which means it takes about 80 hours just to leave Besaid. My point is that -most- gamers aren't like that, and it's pointless and also irresponsible to make in-game rewards that requires such behaviour.

Post a Comment
LOGIN or REGISTER to post a comment or rate this article.
 
More On GameRevolution