Does it make me a bad person that I'm considering stopping playing Project Sylpheed, just because their Achievement design is so insanely bad, despite the fact that the game itself is basically kind of fun? 

Ultimately I think it helps put things in perspective... there are games I'll keep playing on the 360 just to get the Achievements (my recent binge on Achievements in Viva Pinata, for example), and then there are good games that I play on other, lesser, non-Achievement generating systems.  I've finally gotten around to playing Baten Kaitos on the Gamecube (via the Wii back-compat), for example.  So I guess I just need to hold games with insanely bad Achievement design to that standard -- would I be playing it if it were merely on the PS3 or Wii?

To give you an idea of just how bad Project Sylpheed's Achievements are... you have subobjectives in each mission... which are never told to you... you just find out at the end of the mission how many you completed.  Some, but not all, of them are magically tied to Achievements... and you can't replay a mission to get better subobjectives.  Missed one in back on mission 8?  Have fun replaying the entire campaign to hope you discover a subobjective that happened to be relevant.

There is no way a rational, sane-minded human being could have thought this was a good idea.  Even if you think Achivements should be punishingly hard, this is just an awful way to do them. 

Achievements are really good when they're good.  But so many games seem just do the most soul-crushingly bad things with them for no apparent reason.  Project Sylpheed actually has some decent design sensibilities otherwise, and almost kind of scratches that Wing Commander itch for me that has gone so very, very long without being scratched.  (Note to EA -- Wing Commander Arena ain't gonna cut it).

I should stop writing this rant before I get even more torqued up about lost opportunities and go to sleep...