Cetra29

Member
 PSN Profile
  • Content count

    27
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

8 Neutral

About Cetra29

  • Rank
    Newbie

Recent Profile Visitors

318 profile views
  1. You cannot seriously expect the 100s of videos that I make to be thoroughly explained step by step. I will record about 500 hours after all. There are a lot of videos that one does not necessarily need and those that one needs the most have the relevant terms as video title. That should be enough.
  2. This has nothing to do with "in the English language", especially when its not even true. The English language also lives of contextualization. I did not want to do that but let's take the most extreme example: Imagine you have a task with a goal to reach. The task itself can be very well put off by you with moderate trouble. Ending the task and reaching your goal with it needs yout lifetime + one additional moment. It is literally impossible to reach this goal and it solely depends on the execution time. And yes, that is difficulty in one context. It is an obstacle to overcome. And this obstacle itself is too high to overcome. Maybe one wants to disregard that because the case of impossibility is quite unfair but even then the derivation itself is very easy to understand. And if we really want to play the "you just don't want even though you have the choice" pseudo-philosophical card: No. While it is in the most superficial sense true that we have a choice the "choice" in situation itself is something that can really often be disregarded and yes, that is truly a topic where you can disregard something. Do I have the technical choice of letting myself killed instead of protecting myself and kill the other person? Technically yes. Practically though it is highly idiotic to consider that as a situation where you have "options" and anyone who wants to argue that is just in for a pseudo-philosophical argument. And while that was one of the extreme examples as well it still also can be derived to: Even spending my time cannot always be considered an actual "choice" because those who have to take responsibility for something cannot really do anything else but choose the other thing. And these are the examples where you can see "having always a choice" is highly hypocritical, polemical almost when stated that (not that I call the above one polemical). Anyway ... And as I have explained to the other guy above you, even when you just use the word "effort" it still is virtually impossible to disregard time because effort itself is something that highly depends on time. And as said, even without the contextualization of effort and everything, time in an on itself very well is a thing. So to get back to this: "When you claim that difficulty does not equal effort, you are factually incorrect. Yes, it does." You are factually incorrect actually and that begins with your view that apparently someone here disregards effort. On the contrary. You are automaticaly disregarding other in reality existing contexts (time alone) while not really seeing that the effort argument itself that you bring up also cannot live without the time investment factor that is paired with the whole skill-thing. It is impossible to disregard time and you are making the same mistake as the one before you by trying to defend your argument without actually seeing beyond what we others explain and instead defending your claim of what difficulty is with the claim of what difficulty is. That is a circular argument. Such things work for axiomatic reasonings. But not here. And while skill-based difficulty is a thing EVEN THAT is already a very foggy factor because that one is also based the best on "how much effort does a newbie need to overcome this obstacle?" while time is a more clear factor, always included, alone or not and definitely an actual considerable limited ressource to be spent. Time limitation exists just as skill limitation. And do you know how language evolves? From constant usage. How come many people understand my point (I am not talking about this website alone, you see) when it is apparently so hard to understand or confusing? It really is not. And that means that people have a certain understanding of this word as well. And that is not "wrong", it simply is contextualization, Just as the strawberry example. Or the fact that people use "calories" whenever they mean "kilo calories" or everyone says "vagina" when they actually mean "vulva". Answer something out of its respective context and it might be wrong. But within that it can be right. Especially when something like language grows and it is not like this difficulty thing is out of thin air. It is pretty easy to understand, I'd say. And if someone still does not want to understand about time investment, then lets delve further into it and talk about time-management. I do not only mean "how do you spend your time in SO4?" but "can you even spend your time in SO4" and time-management IS an actually existing thing that can be hard. There is a LOT to say about time from which you cannot remove it simply because it exists. And to finally phrase it: "Do you think this goal is easy to accomplish without spending much time?" "No?" "Then it is hard to achieve it without doing so." Even the Thread Creator differentiated with one simple and single word: "Literal". That is acknolwedging the existence of one as well as other meanings.
  3. "It says little about the difficulty of the game" is where your problem lies though because you are treating it like a natural law that the "difficulty of a game" := "skill-based difficulty" which it isn't. The entire basis is already flawed by claiming that it is just that alone. It is like insisting that a strawberry is under all circumstances a berry because we all call it a berry when, as a matter of fact, a strawberry is NOT a berry from the perspective of botanics. Just as the prioritizing part is true BUT not the only thing because time is not only about prioritizing alone.
  4. You literally ignored and entire post that very thoroughly explained that these things are not conflated and are not just about your forum posts. With this I am sorry but you are not in for any discussion. Definitions are not just about your definitions and I have made really spent a lot of time yesterday to make this stuff easier to understand but you just prefered to not read it. This is not about "simple shit". "Simple shit" is that it is not just about your definition of time and I have provided a pretty reasonable explanation for that. Now I ask you to please stop talking about "posting about the trophies" all the time because I ad infinitum already explained that I am not talking about solely trophy definitions.
  5. I am actually doing this a second time. And I still love it.
  6. So I am currently uploading videos on my channel as I am getting the Platinum for the PS4 version as well. I do not know how many people actually want it but I might link it here then. Maybe some people like to have a lot, lot, lot of videos.
  7. The problem is you are wrong with that: Am I not conflating them the way I am talking about it. There is no such thing as just one difficulty. It is all about the context and I already began to show how to differentiate that in my last post. You cannot merely go out and say something is only hard (or difficult) to achieve when the modalities themselves require you to overcome an obstacle by skill, gameplay, et cetera. That is just the difficulty of achieving something in ONE context. A specific context. But not the only one that exists. Like the other guy who seemed to reply to be polemical instead of considering what I have already explained - and although he wanted to diss the game he already showed that there are multiple ways of "chores" that one can get through and needs to endure provided by the statement in his very first post about the characters - we have a very limited amount of time. And we already have to make our decisions of how to spend that time. Now the problem is that a limited resource such as time we never can truly get more of, just try to manage it better. And one cannot afford to spend this time, actually some tasks might be impossible to achieve just because of the time itself. Thus it is not actually logical to say the difficulty of achieving something is defined only by the skill (or the likes) you have to invest. Which is why it is also not "conflating" things because I am talking about difficulty from two different approaches. There are things in life that from a skill-demanding point of view you could easily get. And yet themselves to actually in the end be hard to achieve simply because you are not able to invest the amount of time required. And if time actually exists as a resticting factor it directly provides some relevance to difficulty. As a matter of fact you already brought in a very very good term: Effort. Let me take your skill examples and expand: In the context of difficulty defined by overcoming in obstacle through sheer skill we ALSO cannot truly dismiss the factor of time because skill is simply something someone has to learn and learning also requires time (actually the part of the cake that you already took and wanted to show me). And when it is something skill-wise harder to achieve you will also need more time to craft your skills to perfection, et cetera, pp. You see, I am not even talking about time like THIS and yet it is everywhere - you basically just gave me another example of why it can never be dismissed. And yet, as said, even time alone on something that requires merely any effort can hardly be dismissed. You are saying "you just need to take a look at time for yourself to know" but I am talking about things in a broader spectrum not just while talking about forums that put one thing in one thread and another in the other. A person with a family that actually does all and everything he can do in his spare time to do such things for his own entertainment will still probably never achieve these things even though the task itself from mere execution is not problematic for him. The limited time can nevertheless make it an impossibility for him. Difficulty by skill is ONE factor. A factor that cannot disregard time (or the combined factor of effort) as well as sole time itself can hardly be disregarded in a fair consideration. When something is an element of a set with restrictive influential power it can serve as an obstacle and thus be considered as a factor for difficulty in one or the other way, even if skill is not the problem. think the post now should have cleared this up though and actually this entire discussion was not even necessary because you have phrased one sentence as "... then you know this 'difficulty' already ..." and while you have out it in quotation marks you still actually have acknowledged this by thinking of the respective context I was talking about. A context that very well exists. Having trouble to do and get something because you lack the time is a real thing. This trouble can increase the more time it needs. Time can be an incredibly restrictive factor. If your mere concern is the confusion of users when they read posts I cannot really agree because I have yet to see someone being confused about such things (more like people actually understanding the point when they also think about a time-eating task) while only seeing those who are eager to say "difficult != time-consuming", so it does not even come to the confusion part and only those who disagree actually come out to post against that. And we cannot even go out and say "put not as we are talking about it!" because even the thread creator himself put it differently giving me the opportunity to very well talk about this in a proper manner. And even if he didn't it still should be listened to for the sake of fairness.
  8. Yes, time-consuming is hard. If you are paying with nothing but your life time, even if there is no effort of learning or anything behind it, it is still incredibly hard because it is something that is hard to get. So yes, time-consumption equates difficulty as well, just differently. And the rumor that it is not should die. If the game in one way or the other wants you to spend a a lot of time for it, then it is hard to get it otherwise people would actually get it. And yes, even if you do not need to be present it can still be counted as hard because that still is planning, dedication, a lot of electricity, etc. You know how I can say that? Because that was the only hard thing for me. Even the Ethereal Queen is an incredibly loser and the only difficulty comes from not killing her too fast and to know when to switch a character out for Lymle. The battle itself is not hard simply because you are expected to be so good at this point that she is just a strong enemy with many HP.
  9. Well that comment is a bit misleading.
  10. Pretty sure the 200 quests involve the hunting missions and those do not count for trophies anyway. Except Adamantaimai which has its own. How did you guys like the dungeons? Some are very small but some are decent like the tower where you get that great sword aber fighting the dragon and the mine is also okay I guess. The volcano could have been much more. A lot of wasted potetial. Same for the vesperpool forest.
  11. Oh sorry, I quoted the wrong person.
  12. The story's problem is just that there is just not much, it feels incredibly sparse. That gets way better til the end but before that it is a problem. Even knowing Kingsglaive and Brotherhood it is not that much and even having seen those secret camping scenes with like Noctis and Prompto talking about the past while sitting on a motel roof which definitely should be obligatory instead of hidden, it is still not much. Final Fantasy often has those subplots that ultimately lead together to everything and I think that is one of the things that its lacking, together with some other story aspects such as not enough screentime for characters like Luna. The final scene still saved it for me.
  13. Not everything in your quest archives is a sidequest for the trophies. Some are story and hunting quests that do not count.
  14. That I am like one of the first 30 people to have the platinum, worldwide, not one list alone is pretty cool. Though I cannot help but feel that the trophy list really was unnecessarily easy. Really the only "annoying" trophy is Gladiolus Level 10. They should have dome more sidequest trophies, a complete playthrough on normal or Adamantaimai on normal, defeating more of those huntable monsters, et cetera. Maybe also trigger those camping story scenes that are surely not seen by many people who do not camp too much.