Premium Member
 PSN Profile
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

11 Good

1 Follower

About yndajas

  • Rank
    Premium Member
  • Birthday 07/31/91

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

644 profile views
  1. The wolves in mission 8 are surely the fastest method for everything except shotguns and launchers. You don't need to adjust your aim (unless you get really bad recoil that doesn't reset), and you can get through a weapon in about 15-20 minutes. You can also run back to the start to change your weapon loadout, though that takes a while. For shotguns and the XM-53 I used mission 11 but I managed to get an infinite spawn in the middle left room in the courtyard (the one with an ammo crate). Go there right at the start (don't destroy the first A.S.P.) and if you're lucky, you'll get robots dropping just in front of the exit of this room (on the objective side) every few seconds, and you won't get respawning P.A.W.W.S. For the BlackCell, destroy the first A.S.P. and Wraith in the courtyard then lock onto the infinitely spawning talons at the far end (but stay at the start of the courtyard for safety/refuelling on Emergency Reserve).
  2. @Sly Ripper @BlindMango any response on this? This site shouldn't be preventing trans people's deadnames from being hidden, now that you can effectively hide it on PSN services. At a minimum, this should be hideable from public view.
  3. @Sly Ripper - thanks for your work on this, but this particular feature is an issue for trans people (like me) who've changed their PSN ID to avoid being deadnamed. Would you consider making it an optional feature, so that deadnames aren't hanging around in public view?
  4. Edit: complete If anyone wants to boost the co-op trophies, let me know. PSN ID: yndajas Ynda (they)
  5. Totally agree with you - ambiguity and misinterpretation in interaction really bother me! - and same, at least in writing! I'm not a big point and click fan anyway to be honest - they were somewhat spoiled for me by a period of messing around with casual, mass-produced Big Fish Games titles, as fun as I found them at the time! And I don't like the idea of point and click using a console controller. Anyway I'll give it a go and see how I get on. I'm not a big reader, despite being in academia, but if it's fairly queer, visual(ly pretty) and involving puzzles, I might have fun.
  6. Pretty much. Polyamory is typically defined a couple of ways: the ability to love/have romantic feelings for multiple people simultaneously maintaining multiple romantic relationships simultaneously When I say I'm polyamorous I mean (1), but when I say I'm flexibly polyamorous I mean I'm open to (2) but don't necessarily require it of a relationship, i.e. I can do monogamy. Regarding (2), it's often called ethical non-monogamy, which brings with it the requirement that the multiple relationships are consented to by all parties immediately adjacent to you within a romantic network, i.e. you can't have a secret relationship because that would just be cheating (unless you'd agreed that extra relationships are fine but should be kept secret from each other, of course!). There's also relationship anarchy, in which no one relationship can be considered the primary relationship (many polyamorous relationships are hierarchical, with a main relationship being much like a typical monogamous one - being the main companion of a person - but allowing secondary, less prioritised romantic relationships). Hope that's clear - I sometimes write in complex sentences and assume too much prior knowledge, since language, gender and sexuality is my thing! That game has been sitting in my library for a while and I've always been intrigued by the pretty logo when considering what to play next, but never remembered what the game was like from when I would've checked out gameplay videos. Now I definitely need to put it near the top of my list - thanks for the heads up! Also speaking of they/them pronouns, I feel like I noticed them being used to refer to a specific character in The Swords of Ditto, but I stopped reading the dialogue after a while and didn't notice it again, so it was probably a very brief use if my memory isn't completely faulty. That was a cute and pretty fun 2D Zelda-like game. Not a super difficult platinum, more just a bit of a grind.
  7. I stumbled across this thread when searching the PSNProfiles forum to see if anyone had mentioned the implications for trans people of the potential username/name change feature (after looking for any reports on how smoothly the testing is going). Nice to see this space exists! And nice to see clear and meaningful allyship from people like @ProfBambam55 (you helped me with GTA IV trophies ages ago, so hi!)! I'm non-binary/genderqueer, transfemme, queer and flexibly polyamorous. Pronouns they/them. Feel free to add me, but leave a message to say you found me on PSNProfiles! ☺️ (My PSN username is currently in my deadname by the way, but you can find it on here.) Ynda
  8. luckily I'm at peace with never having a 100% completion record - I'm not skilled enough for that!
  9. Think we're permanently locked out latest message from 2K below. --- Hello Andy, Thank you for getting back to us so quickly! We strongly apologize, but this prelude bonus game was timed. Meaning that after a certain time, you wouldn't be able to play it anymore. We hope you will understand and we wish you a great day playing NBA 2K17. I'm sorry for any inconvenience this issue may have caused you. Should you have any additional 2K related questions, please feel free to let us know in your next message. Best regards, Mathieu R. 2K Support
  10. I'm not looking for anything in return for these items but unfortunately the certified went quickly. If you message in the PSN I can let you know who might have it in case you want to try them.
  11. I'm all sorted now and have these items if anyone needs them (free): 3 x rare (+1 in seven days) 2 x very rare (one certified; +1 in seven days) 1 x certified (very rare) 1 x import 2 x keys in seven days Where it says in seven days, that's because of game-imposed restrictions on when you can trade certain items. Message me on the PSN if you need any of the above
  12. Okay now I have two tradable very rares and need three rares. Or two rares I can swap for two very rares. Anyone? PSN: andylaw31
  13. I have two very rare items, one rare and one common. I need to get five of the same quality for the Trade Secret trophy (my last trophy to 100%). Willing to trade either of the very rares for uncommons or rares, or do any other deal that gets me in the right direction! PSN: andylaw31
  14. I agree 2 x 50% being more than 1 x 0.01% feels weird and devaluing of higher rarity trophies, though I'd still argue it's technically the most accurate measure of actual sum rarity - you beat 50% of people on a trophy, you get 50 points; beat 90% of people, get 90 points and so on - but I think 50/rarity does feel better. An explanation that it's weighted and therefore slightly distorted, and potentially an unweighted points column would be good (the latter would need scaling up to 0-500 if 500 is the max in the weighted column in order to provide a useful comparison).
  15. Okay long post... If it's going to be a rarity leaderboard then surely it should be directly measuring rarity? I believe inverse percentage is the most accurate and only direct way to represent sum rarity (rather than average rarity) in a points system: 99.99% = 0.01 points; 0.01% = 99.99 points. No need for any caps and all points are weighted according to actual rarity, as in the number of people who have achieved the trophy of those who have played the game. If the data is available, why distort away from it? Having said that, the quasi-logic (?) of "50 x rarer = 50 x more rarity points" as in the 50/rarity measure - whilst skewed and therefore distorting away from true rarity - has a nice feel to it. So I'd give that merit as an alternative. The more complicated formulae are clever but they distort too far away from it being a rarity measure towards being a rarity hunting measure. No reason rarity hunting couldn't form a separate leaderboard, but I think the measure could be much simpler, e.g. number of ultra rares or uber rares if a <=1% category was created. Or slightly more complicated: number of rarest category, followed by number of second rarest category, followed by number of third rarest category and so on. I think finding a perfect solution for measuring something like rarity hunting is impossible, because what constitutes good/bad/worthless hunting and how that can best be measured is very subjective, as evidenced by the differences in opinion in this thread. Regarding an average rarity measure, initially I liked the idea but I think @starcrunch061 and @dmland12 make important points about not punishing people for playing more: an average would probably just end up revealing the people who actively avoid easy trophies. I'd guess that's too small a minority to warrant a dedicated leaderboard page unless dedicated leaderboards pages were to be proliferated, but I think a proliferation of leaderboards would create clutter: part of the beauty of this site is the lack of clutter, so it should be avoided. However, I think it's good for people - however much in the minority they may be in specific cases - to have the option of chasing the statistics that interest them and comparing themselves against everyone else. Policing the measures people use for their own hunting fun is pointless. So maybe a longer-term development could be custom leaderboards where you can create your own measure using any of the variables within the database? I'm guessing this would be a lot of work for @Sly Ripper though, and probably quite resource-intensive for the database/site? One final thought/alternative suggestion along the lines of @Brightblade76's that incorporates much of the above and might make nearly everyone happy... a leaderboard with three measures: sum rarity (unweighted), sum rarity (weighted) and average rarity. By default it's ordered by sum rarity (unweighted) (or sum rarity (weighted) if people really prefer distortion...), but you can re-order it by clicking the other column headers. That way it accommodates many rarity hunting tastes. But again whether it would be too resource-intensive for the database/site, I don't know. Whatever the end result(s), I think it would be good to have some explanation (outside the forums) of the calculation methods where they aren't obvious from the label alone. This thread highlights the differences in how people conceptualise statistics and how to measure them, if nothing else!