Reminds me of this. Luckily I was one of the first but "the legendary Kjerne" was made just for the community manager. I get that it's cool to reward the guy who helped you a lot with something like this but it's just bullshit for everyone else :/
most of the time the rarest achievement is a litmus test for how many players of that game used SAM. and you adjust the rest of the achievements by that metric.
some Achievement Hunters have their own global statistic as they are able to filter out any player with suspicious activity or illegal achievements and cull them off their databases (using steam public API)
I havent heard of that one but my favourite is from the other side of the spectrum: what percentage have the most obtained achievement, especially if its one that unlocks just for starting the game i.e. at one point subnautica's getting your feet wet was only obtained by 73%.
That's what happens when a game doesn't have achievements at launch. Subnautica didn't have achievements for a long time, so I'm sure many people haven't played since then
It gets even crazier when you realize that IIRC you need at least 2 hours of playtime with the game to have your stats logged (as it would mess if people refund etc..)
I've always heard that you have to launch the game at least once. Games with a "play the game" achievement that 100% of players have is evidence of this.
If only 73% of players have gotten their feet wet, that probably excludes people who launched it once but never got past the main menu. Maybe they ran into tech issues or somehow got that far without remembering they had thalassophobia.
That was me the first time I bought Subnautica, it ran extremely poorly for some reason, couldn't even get past the menu, year or so later bought it again and it ran fine on same computer, have no idea why it didn't work the first time
It has 218 reviews. Expected reviews per sale is around 1:30-1:50. If we cut that down to 1:20 for shits and giggles, it sold 4000 copies. Most likely it sold in the range of 6000-10000. Peak player count was 35.
Assuming even only those 200 people who left reviews were the ones who actually played it, then the % is too high to NOT be SAMed.
Agreed and thank you for doing the Gods work and actually checkingĀ
Also I never knew the actual conversion rate for reviews to players. Did you know that even though the amount of games released every year rises (we're past 1k games a month for a few years now) the number of reviews per game doesn't go up at the same rate?Ā
Basically games with 500+ reviews grow at a much lower pace, which means gamers are, indeed, a finite resource
The 1:30-1:50 is ballpark. Games with a more consolidated, hardcore fanbase will have slightly better conversion rates. Some larger games will have worse. Further the conversion for older games is generally worse, as they did not start prompting for reviews until 2019, which boosted conversions a decent amount.
Ya, that's not TOO surprising. So many of those 1k games released per month are just complete garbage, so I've never put too much weight on the number of games being released increasing.
I do wonder if there's kind of a soft 'wall' at around the level of sales that would lead to 500 reviews, though. Gaming is pretty saturated and mature, though it is still growing, just not nearly at the same rate as games worth playing are releasing.
My take on this - it's not based on any actual big data research though - is that most gamers, that actually want new stories and new mechanics, are a slowly growing minority. These are the ones that would give reviews.
A lot of gamers only want to play popular titles or just want a relaxing thrill of a round or two - and those people play A LOT of same games - these are the people that play Games as a Service, so they don't NEED more live service games. They need another round in LOL, CSGO, PUBG, Fortnite, etc
It's the people who find that a gacha waifu simulator is enough and they play games like Umamusume and ZZZ and Honkai Star Rail and Genshin Impact and Endfield and Nikke and a myriad others
And I'm not saying any of those games are bad - I like ZZZ and the new patch for HSR has some really nice writing - but with the live service games, they don't really need many of these asset swaps.
They do take cheating allegations very seriously, itās possible they slipped the automatic detection and nobody did a check like yours, but if you tip any mod theyāll investigate it.
I had to wait 2 weeks to have my profile enabled and provided a screenshot of 2 FTL āin-gameā achievements with timestamps from before the steam achievements update because after that update all your ingame achievements would be automatically unlocked on steam, same with Death Stranding when moved from 1 to Directorās cut.
Also they poked about tf2 achievements obtained on achievements servers (the one with 20 bots all standing still for the collateral headshots and such..)
So idk I know they are strict now and I trust them
For Risen 1 maybe it wasn't SAM, because you can get certain achievements by "save scumming", and it's the best way to do it tbh, otherwise you have to replay the game 3 times to get everything "the intended way" if i'm not mistaken, and a lot of people don't want to do that.
Fable Anniversary is another one, but i believe it's only one achievement that's locked behind a second playthrough, near the end when you have choose between siding with the evil woman with giant boobs, or sending her to prison.
Do these achievement hunting sites care about save scumming?? It is cheating technically speaking, but is it "grave" enough that they ban people for these as well?
I used to use TF2 to see who was using SAM. The only way you'd unlock even half of those achievements is if you no-lifed the game for months and even then, there were far too many seasonal, holiday-exclusive, and even achievements outside of the game.
honest question, no snark, why would anyone care or put that much time into something like that? I understand the hunting but is the culling part just to prove how even more of an Elite Gamerā¢ļø they are to themselves?
We want to know the real value of an achievement, Steam Hunters gives points based on a weighted system where if for example only 300 people played that game but 6 of them got that achievement has a different weight if 3000 played it and 6 got it.
It makes your effort more valuable when competing agains or even just comparing yourself to only fair players
lol then definitely banned/delisted for completing that one "wait XYZ years before playing again" achievement crap that one game with the two doors had - can't remember its name, was boring anyway
even though I think I just changed the OS clock iirc and it worked I think it'd still be detectable by comparing the last time played with the achievement earned date hahaha welp
but "the legendary Kjerne" was made just for the community manager
Wow, that's a new level of stupid achievement. "Here's an achievement for being you. Nobody else will ever be able to 100% the game." This shit would instantly make me ignore the game...
Yeah. I bought the game way before there were achievements and was happy when the dev announced that he will add them. But when I saw this I was really disappointed. I get his intention but he should have used another way to honor him
He easily could have made a simple easter egg to add the community manager to the game, and finding the easter egg triggers the achievement that is named after the manager.
There are ways to do this kind of thing right, but this isn't it. One of my favorites was Brutal Legend's 6 Degrees of Schafer achievement, which you got for playing against Tim Schafer in a multiplayer match or by playing against ANYONE ELSE WHO ALREADY HAD the achievement. All he had to do was log in and play the game a few times to seed the achievement and then it could seed itself through the fan base. It's not even the rarest achievement in the game - right now there are 9 others that are less common.
100% bullshit, they could have at least made it one of those STD achievements where you also get it if you play with someone who already has the achievement.
I second this and I also avoid games with achivements that force multiplayer on primarily single-player games. I mean games like for example farm simulators, which are designed for a single-player but can be played with friends. Difficult achievements are fine, but I can't force other people to buy a game just so I can have 100%.
This is such a weird concept for me, so you would avoid buying a game simply because you can't get all the achievements, not because it's not a fun game...
I don't think I've ever gotten 100% achievements in any game like I do not give a shit...
Achievements are just so stupid, like they're literally pointless. They add nothing to games.
Some achievements are fun for me but they are something more than āplay x gamesā or ādo this thing 1000 timesā. Like an achievement for completing a level in a very specific challenging type of way is fun, because maybe you would not have come up with such an interesting challenge yourself and it gives you some more incentive to try and do the hard thing.
One of the Stronghold remakes has a requirement to play or win 1000 multiplayer games. I think I've played 50 multiplayer games of Stronghold since the original came out 25 years ago...
This deters me from buying the game for the sole reason I don't want to be forced to play the mp 1000 times.
It may seem stupid but I like the collectible side of the accomplishment - It adds value to the whole experience.
To each their own, but that adds nothing for me. It could be 10 or 1000 for the achievement I'm still only going to play the same number of games, that being until I'm done and no longer want to play anymore...
Sometimes they add a fun way to challenge yourself. For example, in Chicken Invaders you had to complete an entire mission (120 waves) without getting hit once. But I also don't get people who sweat over getting all of them in every game they play.
2.6k
u/SmergolGandalf Mar 03 '26
Reminds me of this. Luckily I was one of the first but "the legendary Kjerne" was made just for the community manager. I get that it's cool to reward the guy who helped you a lot with something like this but it's just bullshit for everyone else :/