PSN Profile
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

473 Excellent

About Matto_lsi

  • Rank
    Resident Completionist

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

2,311 profile views
  1. For me it's more monetary. I bought my 360 pro new in 2008. 2 years later it red-ringed. I bought my PS3 slim new in 2010. 3 years later the disc drive stopped reading discs. A year after that the HDD failed. I bought my PS4 slim new in 2017. The disc drive made a loud crunching sound the first day when taking in or ejecting a disc and I immediately returned it and got a new one. 2 years later the disc drive stopped reading discs (just like my PS3). I figure at this point my luck with consoles is always going to be bad, so might as well wait and pay a lot less than a launch console, since it's going to break anyway.
  2. I had to use these links to 'purchase' this months PS+ games as the webstore wouldn't even load the store listing, let alone allow me to 'purchase' them. What a shitshow. Thanks for providing the old store links, still 1000 times better than the new garbage they gave us.
  3. This was 2 years ago, so I have no idea if the game is still on PS Now. I've never subscribed to the service, I only used the free trial. Back when I did it, I had a basic 20mbps cable connection, and PS Now servers sucked (I got dropped every 30 mins or so, sometimes less, sometimes more), but my understanding is the service is much better these days (plus my connection is better, as are most, perhaps yours too?). If this game is still on there, then the pass should be active, cause it was 2 years ago. No reason they'd change that. But I can't make any guarantees. You might be able to reach out to PS Support and ask, but they're pretty worthless and will probably give you a nonsensical canned response. However if you only want the 2 trophies for this game, it takes no time at all to get them. But if you want to play through multiple games with a 1 month sub, that's something else entirely. I have no idea what kind of experience you'll have. I'd suggest researching it her and on other sites to see what people in the same country as you with similar connections are experiencing. Good luck!
  4. While I haven't had any truly terrible boosting sessions here, I used to use the gaming sessions on TT and TA (as others already mentioned) and found their feedback system to be a very, very welcome thing. Again, as someone already said, the fact that it's a 'sliding scale', so you can effectively give positive feedback - not just negative - means that there's a lesser potential for abuse. One bad session where a clown votes you down won't really affect you overall as people see the other 50+ positive ratings. With all that said, I have found some really wonderful and helpful people on this site to boost with. I rarely boost cause I hate online components in most games and often choose to just play something else instead, and often when I do play games with online components I just do it organically. But occasionally when I want to boost or someone from here sees me playing the same game and simply reaches out to boost with me, it's been very enjoyable. I still have most of those people on my friends list even though in many cases I haven't 'played a game with them' in years. They were just quality people. It sounds like you got one of the (semi?) rare clowns. I feel like the more popular games with really active online game modes probably have the most awful people looking to exploit others to boost. These aren't the normal adult gamers you find on this site looking for mutual help. They're often the toxic and immature types you don't even want to be playing a game with in the first place. I imagine the online community for GTA IV is made up of a greater percentage of those types than most other, casual games. Maybe not though, I don't know. I did GTA IV on 360 back in the day and have never tried it on PS3. I had a good boosting partner for most of it, but we did exactly 1 for 1, and he had a lot of the races completed, so I spent a lot of time trying to win dozens of the races on my own. It was hard enough to boost the other game modes with just the two of us, but having to do all those races was a nightmare, and I wasn't able to find another boosting partner. So I was never interested in playing it again. I'm surprised people are still playing it, actually. Good luck to you finishing it up. Hopefully you have better luck with future boosting partners.
  5. I did NG+ on Ultra Hard right after I finished my first playthrough on the super easy 'story' setting, and even with quadruple damage and half-damage output compared to my first run, it wasn't really hard. Most of it could be called easy or easily cheeseable. As others above said, stick only to the main story. The only part I found challenging was the final boss fight. The lead-up to it wasn't particularly care-free either, but with the right strategy is wasn't bad. But for me, the boss fight required some luck. I used pretty much everything in my arsenal. Since I don't have the DLC, I was using only vanilla game gear. Since you have the DLC, you might have the better gear available, which should make this fight a little easier.
  6. Right, but the Rams just clobbered one of the teams in the divisions you mentioned above. And the Niners beat the Rams last week. And as I noted, every team in the divisions you mentioned have propped up records. I said I agree they've had little competition, but my point was so have the other divisions. All the teams with 4, 5, and 6 win records have each only played a couple games against teams that aren't doing terrible this season. So everyone's record is propped up. And again, the NFC West isn't the only division playing the NFC East, so is the AFC North who you singled out as being so much better than the West. You implied all the teams in the West would be hurting if they faced them, as well as the NFC North and South, and there's no evidence whatsoever that'd be true. Since everyone in those 4 divisions has had an equal number of 'easy' competitors and have similar records, I'd say they're probably evenly ranked. And yes, the NFC West is the best division in football, you look at the W/L record to determine that. Not only do they have a combined 19 wins - which is more than any other division in either conference - but they are the only division where every team has a winning record. On the cusp of mid-season, that means something. And I know how the schedule is setup, especially concerning which AFC division teams each NFC division plays each season. I've been a football fan for over 30 years. The AFC North is irrelevant. None of the teams in the NFC from the 3 divisions we're talking about will play anyone from the AFC North this season, outside of the SB. The NFC East is terrible without even considering the games they've played against the AFC North. And when I spoke about the chances of the NFC West teams all making the playoffs, and considered their main contenders being the top 2 teams in each the NFC North and NFC South, yes, the AFC North is completely and 100% irrelevant. The only possibility for any of the relevant NFC teams to play an AFC North team is if they make the SB, and that has no bearing on who makes the playoffs. And since there's no way for them to play each other during the season, when it could actually affect their record and playoff chances, the AFC North is irrelevant in a discussion about who is best in the NFC and whether or not the NFC West can get all 4 teams into the playoffs. But you are right, there is a lot of season left to be played. I never disagreed with that. I simply said that the main factor to potentially denying a sweep by the NFC West would be 4 teams in 2 other divisions and whether or not they falter down the stretch. There really wasn't anything inflammatory in what I said, but it seems there always has to be a contrarian on internet message boards.
  7. The NFC north? You mean like the Bears who faced the Lions, Giants, Falcons, and Panthers and are currently getting blown out by the Rams? They're 1-2 against teams with winning records. Or the Packers, who've faced the Vikings, Lions, Falcons, and Texans? 1-1 against teams with winning records. LOL! NFC South? Bucs faced Panthers, Broncos, Chargers, and Raiders and are 1-2 against teams with winning records. Saints faced Raiders, Lions, Chargers, and Panthers and are 1-1 against teams with winning records. AFC North is irrelevant as those teams don't feature in the NFC playoff matchups, and each NFC team only faces 4 AFC teams each season. I do admit that they have an impressive division so far, but same argument can be made. Steelers have faced Giants, Broncos, Texans, and Eagles and only beat 2 teams with winning records. Ravens faced Texans, Bengals, Washington, and Eagles and are 1-1 against teams with winning records. Browns faced Bengals, Washington, and Cowboys and are 1-2 against teams with winning records. Wait a second, aren't they too 'feasting' on NFC East teams? hmmm Now I'm not saying the NFC West is doing a whole lot better, since they've faced the same level of non-competition, but to say that their records are inflated cause they haven't faced teams from other divisions whose records are also inflated by only playing terrible teams, isn't much of an argument. The only team that stands out is the undefeated Steelers, but like all the rest, their schedule has been pretty easy too. If the NFC West had played teams with inflated records from these other divisions, maybe their records would be much different instead.
  8. With the new playoff format, I'm hoping to see entire divisions in the playoffs. For instance, based on how the season has started, it's not outside the realm of possibility for the entire NFC West to make it in. Really the only thing standing in the way of that is the fight between TB and NO in the south and the Bears and Pack in the north. If one of each falter in the second half of the year and all the NFC West teams finish strong, it could happen (unless there's a rule against it, but I didn't see one, the info I found basically just said another wildcard team from the conference would be added). Of course I'm rooting for my Niners either way. Despite a lukewarm start, they're really not doing too bad. They might be in last place in their division, but considering only 4 of the other 12 teams in the conference have a better record (and one of those has played one fewer game, so it might be even) and they still have a winning record in the best division in football, and have had some catastrophic injuries to overcome, and have the 3rd best net points statistic in the conference, I think they're doing just fine. They know how to score and keep other teams from scoring. The trick will be winning division games and staying healthy. But I really wouldn't be surprised at all if all 4 teams in the West finished with a 10+ win season and all 4 teams in the East finished with under 10 wins each. Since it's possible for a team to 'win' their division with a 3-13 record, I'm hoping for that exact result in the East, just to rekindle the discussion of disqualifying a division winner who doesn't stack up. Every year a team finishes under .500, it comes up again. Every year there's a excuse. I truly love the one of 'they had to play the other teams in their division twice', as if playing 3 other terrible teams twice is a justification for handing someone a playoff game (a HOME game, no less). Honestly, who's better: the 6 or 7 win team that got 6 easy games against crappy division opponents, or the 10 win team who finished 3rd or 4th in their division but gets left out of the playoffs cause the 1st and 2nd place team won 12-14 games apiece? Obvious answer is obvious. But this year could set a new standard for pathetic division winners. It's very possible the NFC East winner finishes with as low as 4 or 5 wins. That would be awesome. But looking ahead only to next week, I'm nervous. Yes, the Niners blew the Pats out of the water, and on the road to boot. But with the exception of Brady's 4th quarter theatrics, they did the same thing 8 years ago, also on the road. Remember that game? I do. Niners were up 31-3 halfway through the 3rd quarter. They ended up winning that game by a touchdown, but it got close near the end. And what happened the next week? After flying back from New England, they flew into Seattle, just like they have to do next week. And what happened in that game? They got absolutely destroyed 13-42. I'm seeing a lot of parallels from that season, and it worries me. So I hope the Niners come to play next week, and that history doesn't repeat itself.
  9. 3/4 of the way through the year now! September 2020 Predictions Marvel's Spider-Man (2018)4 God of War (2018)
  10. I haven't played the game yet, but I played Borderlands 2 on every platform in existence, got double Plats and 100% on 360, and I remember for the same explorer trophies that people thought they were bugged when in reality there were just numerous locations that didn't count as named locations, but still needed to be discovered. Most should have been discovered through normal gameplay, but it was possible to miss them. The advice was to look at each map for gray areas and for anywhere the map edge was broken as it meant a small nook that wasn't yet discovered. So maybe check all your maps to make sure you have every inch of the map discovered?
  11. Totally forgot about this thread... My 200th Platinum was Horizon: Zero Dawn on June 10th, 2019. I'm currently at 257 Plats, so I should be able to post to the 300 Plat thread... soon? lol
  12. I find the controversy over the teams name to be interesting. I'd like to share a quote from this article: "But where did the word "redskin" come from? Many dictionaries and history books say the term came about in reference to the Beothuk tribe of what is now Newfoundland, Canada. The Beothuk were said to paint their bodies with red ochre, leading white settlers to refer to them as "red men." According to Smithsonian historian Ives Goddard, early historical records indicate that "Redskin" was used as a self-identifier by Native Americans to differentiate between the two races. Goddard found that the first use of the word "redskin" came in 1769, in negotiations between the Piankashaws and Col. John Wilkins. Throughout the 1800s, the word was frequently used by Native Americans as they negotiated with the French and later the Americans." So in other words, the name is a reference to the Beothuk tribe who painted themselves red, and Native Americans used the word as a self-identifier to differentiate themselves from other races. Now I understand that over time things change, and meanings of words that are used inappropriately for many years can take on a completely new meaning. But I still find the history of the word interesting. The irony is, that the new name options I've seen floating around are only a little better in today's perpetually offended climate. So give it 10-20 years, and people will once again be losing their minds over how offensive the new name is. Might as well just go the Prince route and turn themselves into a symbol at this point. It might be the safest option.
  13. Another month, another guess that won't amount to much, I'm sure. August 2020 Predictions Marvel's Spider-Man (2018) God of War (2018)
  14. I just watched Old Guard. I enjoyed it. I really hope they make a sequel (it's supposed to be a trilogy, but you know how Netflix is, if it doesn't get 400 billion views in its first 10 minutes they consider it a failure).
  15. I wanted to be fancy and try to find something that's technically easier than Mayo, but I just can't. I have some very easy games on my account, but that one will probably never get beat as the easiest. So yeah, my picks are the exact same as Joker's ^^ GT5 was by far the hardest, and not just cause it was grindy (which it was), but because there were SO many really difficult timed races: from the gold times in the Vettel challenge to the nurburgring GT-R time trial and back to the gold times in the license tests (including the fact that Polyphony decided to extend the finish line on some tracks in later patches to make the gold times for license tests even harder!)... hell, to just getting gold in everything!... it was rough. Fun game if you ignore platinum, but absolute nightmare for completionists (like me).