Mirror's Edge developer: "Achievements/trophies have been bad for gaming"

"It narrows games down, it disrupts and diverts attention, and it eats resources that could have made the game better."

In 2005, Microsoft launched the Achievements system for Xbox 360, something that quickly became very popular and led to people both playing their games more thoroughly and in new ways. In 2007, Valve realised it was a good idea and followed suit by pretty much taking Microsoft's Achievement system for Steam, and 2008, Sony did the same thing for PlayStation and renamed them Trophies.

Today it has to be considered something of a video game standard and Nintendo is pretty much the only platform holding company without an Achievement system. While most people seem to either like them or simply don't care, there are also critics. And one of them is Ubisoft Massive's lead gameplay designer Fredrik Thylander, who used to work at DICE on Battlefield and Mirror's Edge when Achievements arrived - and he really don't like them, as revealed on Twitter:

"Unpopular opinion: achievements/trophies have been bad for gaming. It narrows games down, it disrupts and diverts attention, and it eats resources that could have made the game better."

Do you agree with Thylander generally, and does a short game like Mirror's Edge benefit from some extra challenges?