Premium Member
 PSN Profile
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,676 Excellent


About AJ_-_808

  • Rank
    Premium Member

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

3,024 profile views
  1. You have 2 options. 1) hide the game now (which it may already be too late to do - you could've been flagged already and be part of the CRT pending review backlog) and avoid a possible flag Or 2) dont hide it, most likely be flagged eventually, and roll the dice with a public dispute GTA is often a grey area, and the CRT have straight up said they dont like flagging it. You may have a chance if your list doesn't affect the top 50. Your best bet would be to contact one of them and explain your situation.
  2. Thank you. My life was incomplete without ZJ the ball and Zippy the circle I dont think I'd include Firewatch on that list. Firewatch, developed by Campo Santo, has one gay character, as the player can find various notes about two characters, Ron and Dave. Dave is said to have crushed on Ron, who never reciprocated his feelings. If the player manages to find all of the notes, Henry and Delilah have a brief conversation about them, in which Henry mentions that Dave was beaten up at bar for being gay.
  3. I AM right. I have to be because humanity is doomed otherwise. But seriously, I see your point and I can only hope on more right than you are - for said health reasons. My opinion is based off my experience- I dabbled in the current leaderboard for a little while and watched my rank go up as I climbed through dead accounts. After a while I realized it was pointless because the top accounts simply have more time and less life priorities than me (or are team accounts running 24/7), and I said f it. Honestly, I dont care about either leaderboard - I'm just enjoying the debate (sans the sporadic bouts of name calling)
  4. There's already a branch of hunters that chase ultra rares - it's just that they go by the literal number on their profile vs a point value based leaderboard. Sure, some new people may get sucked in, just like some will lose interest and stop. I dont think itd be a health devastating as you think
  5. Yes, I think that goes back to our original debate. Original question- why should a trophy that every one out of two people has (not rare by definition) hold a value on a rarity leaderboard New question- said trophy would likely have a value less than 1, but would technically have value. Do you think that's sufficient?
  6. Do you disagree that people hunting ultra rares exclusively, are probably already do that? If that's how/what they choose to play, why deny them a leaderboard? Trophies in of themselves would be the problem you're getting at, just depends how far down the rabbit hole you want to go.
  7. Well, yes. That's why it's like that now, from a technical standpoint. I'm more interested in hearing from an anti-rarity (for lack of a better term) about why it should remain like that and how they feel it's fair or makes sense. More importantly, why they feel the proposed additional board, that doesnt affect them in any way, should be denied to others. We're never going to have a system 100% perfect for everyone, but the current system has been destroyed by stacks and autopops (in my opinion) more so than quick plats
  8. It's more than 10-15 people and they're not going against the majority as evidenced by the recent threads generating a good deal of interest. How does having an additional leaderboard for people that would like this type of board affect anyone that's not interested in it when the original board is left as is? And why do people that are against the idea often come out swinging calling others 'elitists', but then play victim when 1min plat stacks are brought up? Edit Serious question that nobody seems to want to answer: why should a 1minute platinum that can then be stacked 5 times carry the same exact value (actually 5 times the value) as a platinum that takes 10, 20, 30, etc hours?
  9. If you think that's a personal attack, then you haven't been to many forums my dude. I asked if you were purposely being obstinate because you keep insisting that any and every trophy should be included on a board designed specifically for the opposite. You made a sarcastic attack on a grindy trophy with your GRID example, and I simply told you that "great achievement" comment can go both ways. Your only reasoning given so far is that "great games wouldnt be included and not played". Why are you assuming people are going to completely bypass a popular game just because it's too common for this board? I mean, sure, some people might only hunt ultra rare exclusively, but they do that now anyway. Majority are likely to play common not-rare games in between for, you know, fun.
  10. Why make a cut off point on a leaderboard with the goal of being a competition for rarity vs quantity? At this point, I can only hazard a guess that you're purposely being obstinate. Define rare, and then kindly explain how something every one of two people has is rare. No one is equating rare with difficult except for you, just now. The proposed board has nothing to do with difficulty, it's just a way to build a separate competition away from the low reaching fruit. You balk at a trophy that's rare because it's grindy. Obviously, the proposed board isnt for you. "Great achievement there" Same can be said of someone stacking the same drivel 3+ times, so I wouldn't try to be high and mighty over someone's grindy trophy.
  11. How is it flawed? Why should a trophy that more than half the people have obtained (thus, note being anything close to rare) be given value on a leaderboard that tracks rarity? You understand that as more and more people obtain said trophy, it becomes less and less valuable, right? Technically, you could think of it as having a value of .000000001, or pretty much 0. In any case, it's far less flawed than a board that assigns the same value to a 1 minute platinum as it does to a 100 hour platinum. In my opinion, region and platform autopops (including ps4 --> ps5 autopops, thanks Sony) have ruined the current leaderboard and one that has a scaling value would be more interesting.
  12. I was hesitant to further hijack this thread, but I think that horse took off. @djb5f just wants a scaling point value, which, as far as I know, nobody has argued against. @Thrillhelm wants a high enough cutoff point to include things that, to be frank, arent rare at that percentage. Although, I think there's a misunderstanding. For example, the 70% trophy in SMB might not count on said board, but that doesn't exclude the entire game. People would still get scaling points for each other SMB trophy under EG 50%. There really isn't any good argument against an (additional) rarity board. It allows whomever would like to compete on it a chance to compete a bit more fairly (yes, this is subjective), while letting anyone that doesn't care for it the ability to keep chasing the original carrot. It wouldnt be for everyone, but then again, the current leaderboard isnt either. Edit Addendum A rarity leaderboard would also get more exposure to lost gems as more people purposely target ultrarares from games with few owners. And with a constantly changing (scaling) value system in place, it definitely adds a different sense of competition for those that want it
  13. This. /Thread over Anyway, play whatever you want, but (in my opinion) the bigger problem is 3+ stacks of the same thing. You really arent playing the game at that point, just chasing a pointless leaderboard.
  14. You get.a +1 for mentioning Suikoden.
  15. To put it simply: The speed of your rank up trophies is not possible without a modder affecting your game lobby. Your Run Like the Wind trophy was most likely also affected by said modder, but that one could be debated. Either way, you have a chance this may be lifted since your game time wont affect the top 50. You'll just have to wait for a CRT member to render judgement To everyone else, we dont need any more gta5 over analyzing here, so please refrain from turning this dispute into another 3 page debate.