mekktor

Premium Member
 PSN Profile
  • Content count

    315
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

246 Excellent

4 Followers

About mekktor

  • Rank
    Premium Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

1,491 profile views
  1. Interesting, I did check there but ended up on another guide that didn't include the upgrades.
  2. None of the guides for this game list the upgrades as being required for Perfect Knight. Perfect Knight would only pop if all the other requirements were completed on the same save file (or maybe even the same in-game save slot).
  3. Why should that make the Grounded trophy rarer though? You are talking about the absolute number of people who have earned each trophy (ie. achievers), and yes, the number of achievers should be lower for Grounded. But the rarity is a ratio of achievers to the number of people who have played the game or DLC. If the numbers who have played the game and the DLC are not the same (they aren't), then the rarity doesn't necessarily follow the order you say it should.
  4. Ok sure, but that's such a specific situation. I think you missed what I was getting at though. I was asking about it more generally so the answer could be applied to other more complicated situations too. Like this one: Should Grounded be less common than Survivor? Lets say for the PS3 version. Why?
  5. The obvious difference is that it's impossible to start up the Remastered version without the DLC installed. There are other differences when it comes to free DLC that affects how many of the base game owners actually play the DLC, such as how long after release it was added, whether it is added in a patch (compulsory or not), if a free purchase is required on PSN store, a one off redeemable code included with the game etc. That depends how you define DLC "owners". Is it players who have started the game with the DLC installed? Is it players who have actually started the DLC and attempted to earn those trophies? Take Shovel Knight for example. You boot up the game and the first screen lets you select the main campaign or one of the free DLC campaigns. If you never select one of the DLC campaigns, should you be counted as someone who attempted to earn the DLC trophies (for the purposes of calculating the rarity)?
  6. Are you saying that because the game requires you to have the DLC installed in order to play it, that all players should be counted as DLC owners? What about people who played the game before the DLC was released? Should they be counted as having attempted the DLC trophies when it comes to calculating the rarity? Apologies if I misunderstood what you're saying - I'm not familiar with that game. By the way, you might be interested in this thread. It's not up to date but it's got some good info in it:
  7. If you consider the rarity to mean "number of people who achieved the trophy / number of people who attempted to achieve the trophy", there is no reason that the level 250 trophy should be rarer than the level 100 trophy. It's possible that out of the people who went on to play beyond level 100, a higher proportion made it to level 250 (compared to the proportion of base game players making it to level 100).The only thing you can say for sure is that there should be fewer total achievers of the level 250 trophy.
  8. I think you can use an extension (like uBlock Origin) to filter the red banner on your end. Not ideal but at least you wouldn't see it (and other people visiting your profile don't see it either). By the way, I sympathise with you. I actually think this rule should only cover out timestamps that are out of order as a result of using someone else's save file or in situations where an advantage is gained (like finishing the game faster than should be possible). But some people on this site think the leaderboards will fall apart if they let something like this go. So you just have to decide which of your shitty options is the most tolerable. I know if I ever got flagged (as it truly could happen to anybody), I wouldn't hide anything. I don't need anyone from this website dictating what I do with my PSN account.
  9. Comparing the disputer's 10 second plats to other "legit" 10 second plats and asking how it's any different...Yes it took 10 seconds between the first and last trophies popping in both cases, but that isn't the whole story behind those trophies. Every legit 10 second plat required effort beforehand and that effort counted towards those trophies later on when they were autopopped. The disputer didn't put in that effort for any version of the autopopped trophies. They aren't legitimate. It's like if I was to ask a modder to send me to level 99.9 but then I get the last 0.1 legit. Does that make the level 100 trophy legit? I mean I technically used a legitimate in game mechanic to pass into level 100, but it was all built on previous effort that I didn't put in. Having said that, I'm not gonna lie, 5 flags in 1 is pretty brutal. For what it's worth, I think it probably shouldn't count as 5 strikes, but of course should be hidden. I doubt it's possible to make that happen, though.
  10. Are you suggesting that people who play online games and have their trophies hacked were "asking for it"? In the GTA V example you gave, the only way to guarantee you won't get hacked trophies is to not boot up the online at all. Because even if you play invite only lobbies, you often get booted back into public lobbies without a choice in the matter. Is it reasonable to expect people to just not play the game at all then? And no, whitelisting wouldn't necessarily promote or encourage hacked trophies. For example, the whitelist could be implemented so that if you have hacked trophies in a game, that game doesn't count towards any stats at all but you also don't have to hide the game on your console to stay on the leaderboards. So if you go seeking out hacked trophies you gain... absolutely nothing. You just aren't actively punished for being a victim of hackers. The basic idea of a whitelist is that it is a list of things that is allowed/accepted, which is in contrast to a blacklist for things that are banned/excluded. I'm sure it originally came from the idea that white = good and black = bad, but in this context it has nothing to do with the purity of trophies or games or whatever.
  11. I wouldn't get too excited about that. Even in that linked post it only says that this trophy might be considered for the whitelist, which if it's ever added to the site, could be as basic as still requiring you to hide the game but it not counting towards your 3 strikes.
  12. At this point, there is a plausible explanation suggesting that the reasoning behind the flag was wrong. I think in cases like this, the flag should be lifted and the burden should be on the flagging team to verify the reasoning if they want it to be flagged again. The disputer shouldn't have to wait weeks and rely on help from others to overturn a flag that should not have been applied in the first place.
  13. No, you should have still got it while using the speedrun mode. I guess it just glitched on you for some reason. You might need to delete your save file (and game data while you're at it), and then do another 100% run.
  14. What an ignorant thing to say. Most of my trophies, I don't know anything more about them than what it says in the trophy's description. Why? Because I generally don't pay any attention to trophies at all until after I've beaten the game. Any one of them could have popped incorrectly and I would have no idea that it even happened, let alone how it happened. Then there's all the trophies I earned before I even knew that trophies were a thing. Yeah, I definitely followed a guide and took notes if any of those didn't pop as expected. There may even be trophies on my account that I didn't even earn myself. If there are any of those that are wrong, it must be because my 6 year old nephew got right into the hacking scene as I left him to play while I stepped out of the room, right? The analogy is fine for people who actually cheated trophies, but what about people who didn't? That analogy would be more like: Would you honestly remember walking into that store and buying a coke 3 years ago? What time was it? How much change did you receive? What was name stated on the cashier's name tag? You don't remember? GUILTY. That is how it seems people are treated in some of these disputes. Yes, I remember that time last year when the vending machine didn't give me the coke I paid for (twice) and I actually called them up to get a refund. But no, I don't remember every single other time I bought a coke in the last 5 years. And if someone was to accuse me of stealing one of those cokes, what would I say? Probably something like "I don't remember what happened but I know I didn't steal anything." How does that make me guilty?
  15. Ok, I actually wasn't talking about different regions, so that's why you came up with something different. It doesn't really matter how many accounts are required anyway. What matters is that it's possible on PS3 and PS4, but not on PS Vita. You say that the trophies are bound to the account that originally earned them, and that it is therefore wrong to transfer them. I'm wondering what makes the trophies bound to that account if they haven't been synced. I mean, apparently they are not actually bound at all, considering it is possible to transfer them to a different account.