hehe, you like the term strawman. There is a reason why you have not heard about most of these studies - because they tend to be discredited as soon as they pop up, and they pop up all the time. they all are misconstrued and have a strong sample bias. in a nutshell - there are people with addictive personalities out there, put them in front of a game, and they get addicted. put them in front of a tv, and they get addicted. put them in front of a game with achievements? ??? we have a perfectly good study here!

A person who get addicted to achievements, is the same person how get addicted to gaming and anything else. this is not reflected in these studies. 95% of the population are fine, and there are no such thing as achievement addicting.... or gaming addiction... achievements does not change or brain, or effect our brain, anything more or less than anything else that gives us an endorphin kick, be it achievements, climbing a wall, patting a dog and so on. the big strawman here is your use of the "addiction" to talk about achievements.

in terms of games, it is like saying I am addicted to music in a game, yes the game works without it, and it tells a good story, so gOg should perfectly sell games without sound. Or color.... or ability map keys.... I never map keys, so it is pointless and people who complain about it should be happy they get a DRM free game. there is also studies that shows that people get addicted to tweaking and tinkering and modding, so it is probably a good idea to not have that opportunity. it is for their own good.

and then you put yourself as a judge about what does or does not "provide some worth to our collective culture"... elitist much?

(Yes, I am in a bad mood today)>

If the term fits it should be used, should it not?

(I also somewhat dislike when people constantly/near constantly use logical fallacies to try and convince someone of something or to prove a point)

That doesn't disprove what I said, though....also achievements offer much less "return" for that possible chance of addiction(They don't usually add much to the cultural commons or improve gameplay much, etc).

On the bolded bits: You can say such if you want, but for obvious reasons I choose to remain skeptical on them unless you have proof to back such claims up.

(Some "evidence" to back up my side, albeit slightly anecdotal as I don't have any links atm: All the gamers who obsess over getting every achievement or who play for 20+ hours in a row and foresake food/other things in the meantime.)

It's because they ARE addictive, same as randomized lootboxes and other mechanics devs and publishers added to new games....or do you truly think they did it to be nice to gamers?

You're honestly comparing game features with more worth and use to gamers and value to the the collective culture to silly pics and text that tell people they've done something of note in a game? Really?

*Starts laughing uncontrollably*

A poor comparison(as often such things add value to their lives in some way or provide them with some benefit beyond the positive reinforcement that achievements/etc give), but anything can be done to excess and should be discouraged if need be.

(Eating, playing games or using the net, etc)

And if I may be so bold: you seem to be bothered more so than necessary over a random person stating their opinion on game fluff added by game makers to prey on people's addictive personality traits to make more money(also a bit odd, imo, considering how the userbase here usually feels about DRM/Lootboxes/microtransactions/etc)

It happens to the best of us....thanks for being civil when replying, at any rate, and I hope you feel better later on. :)
=============================================================================

All the above aside, I only said all of it to make a point/share my stance on achievements a bit(and expand on what I said earlier).....not to nag too much on those who like achievements or make it my primary motivation for saying such(or to "lord it over" those who like them), but to just state my stance and explain it.

Also I am done with this topic for now(beyond replying to any replies you make), and will leave it at that for the most part.

Also an aside:

People(in general), imo, seem to be way too entitled(on average) these days....first people complained that devs and IP holders didn't sell old games, then they complained they weren't on the right store, then they were on the right store but not the right price or sold the right way....it's exhausting all the mental hoops they set up for companies to jump through.

I mean what will people complain about if all their complaints are addressed? Companies not wiping their rears when they go to the bathroom or handing them free mints with their games?

Indeed it does, then maybe you should stop using them?:
(and more)

Q.E.D.

I have better thing to do on a Sunday than hitting my head on a brick wall

Hey, you do you...don't let me stop ya. :P

o.0

(Silliness aside, I find it interesting you seem to be indirectly trying to defend something devs/etc mainly added into games to sell more games and prey on people's weaknesses[similar to lootboxes])

-->

People often make mistakes and cannot see them IF and when they make them...that does happen.

Also I don't see the fallacy(likely due to being the one who wrote that bit/unable to tell one's own flaws as readily, if there are any)......could you please explain which type and how I exhibited it?

(Is it me equating achievements being addictive to being worse than games which are also addictive? If so then note that more often games have much more value & cultural significance than achievements, which makes the former somewhat more justifiable than the latter from my pov.)

in the two sentences I took out in post 49 you have no less than 6 logical fallacies (possibly more), see if you can spot them:

Ad populum
Ad hominem
Red herring
False dichotomy
Appeal to authority
False equivalence
Begging the question

in the sentence above, you have at least:
Ad hominem
Begging the question
False equivalence

Can you find them?

there ended the lesson

Again, if you make a point you need to show it and provide proof(show where I did something, how, etc) and not just say "you did some of these things, not gonna say how or where".....i.e. the onus to prove your point is on you at this point.

Also even if I made logical fallacies I still made(imo) some good points, and I don't think making logical fallacies by default fully invalidates a person's points.....I just think people should avoid them in proper debate if they at all can.

that's a very good lesson, you should take it to heart

TBH I was originally just trying to say my peace(as a one off thing) and move on before this whole conversation took off....I had no intent to back it up with pie charts/facts/figures in the first place(though you are right I should practice more what I preach)......that said you still "countered" what I said with a few un-backed examples of what I did wrong & didn't counter what I said properly(especially if you genuinely wanted me to reciprocate).

Also you still haven't countered(or much at least) what I said before: That while games and media are also addictive, they provide a good addition to our collective cultural identity/etc more so than achievements & thus are objectively more "valuable" to society and worthy of being kept/defended than achievements/trophies/similar.

Yes, I may have made logical fallacies while stating such, but you still haven't countered that argument with a proper rebuttal.
=============================================

(Also an aside to myself/everyone else: I see the rep trolls have come in to show yet again that I am a bad bad man for thinking as I do.....do they really think i'll ever leave/change my mind due to some silly red marks?)

I did - "and then you put yourself as a judge about what does or does not "provide some worth to our collective culture"... elitist much?"

A bit, but it wasn't my intent to lord it over anyone or act superior for some vile purpose, or to come off as rude to you/others.

I mainly based what I said before/so far on my observations of said culture(and some various news article and studies over the years, but i'd have to dredge my memory to recall which ones and where they are) and what each added/adds to our collective culture.

Achievements and such have been around what....less than 15 years? And in that time what have they added to said culture/our gaming experiences beyond a feeling of satisfaction one could already get before they came about(from beating the game without them and making their own challenges/goals in game), bragging rights, and keeping track of various stats more easily for some people?

(I would honestly like to hear the answers to those questions btw....so I can see what you can come up with/reply with, and in case I missed something)

(An aside/addition: Everyone judges some things or others for various reasons...every single one of us....no one is exempt from this that I know of.....it's human nature so even if I do it or anyone does it why should it matter? What should matter is what one is trying to accomplish with such actions/words and the context behind them, I think.

I'm also sorry if I came off as rude to you so far....I wasn't originally/mainly** doing it with the intent of making anyone upset on purpose/for bad reasons.

**=Disclosure: I did act a little rude later on with my wording due to feeling a bit on edge, but I tried to keep it as civil as possible.)

it's all subjective, there are no definitions, and arguably everything created by humans adds to the "collective culture" (whatever that means). and the only reason to go into such a discussion is elitist "my culture is better than your culture" debates - and who cares anyway

edit- anyway, this is a release thread, and I am getting out of here, derailed it enough

There can still be observations made as to the good or bad something adds to a people or culture as a whole, or how positively/negatively something affects some(and to what extent of the population).

And people can have good intentions for posting such and not just "elitist" ones: I was/am stating such mainly because I dislike the effect such has on some people & (added to that at the same time) the origin behind them/why they were thought up and implemented, not to be smug about it**.

I also like them a bit but I acknowledge the bad they do and how little they benefit our "collective culture"/also know that games survived without them and think that games made without them are not that much lesser due to lack of them. That is all I wanted to express, which is partially why I kept talking about it as it interests me so much(that is part of the answer as to the why you asked above).

(**=If I came off as smug I am sorry for anyone who thought such)

True, and I as well.

If you read this don't bother replying if you don't want to, but feel free to read into the idea behind collective culture...it is a bit interesting for some people and you might like reading about it. :)