I don’t want dlc to count for my percentage

[HoorayForTyler]

6 minutes ago, DaivRules said:

 

They're not hidden from everyone else: https://my.playstation.com/profile/DaivRules/trophies

 

I only use the trophy part of this site as a backlog manager. All my completed games (except the one I wanted in my trophy cabinet) get hidden when I complete them. You can try to blanket everyone under assumptions, but you'll be wrong 100% of the time.

I think you missed the part where I said “if someone—”, not “if you—”.
 

And using the hidden feature to log finished games makes sense, but is still quite silly. I was more touching on the fact that it’s a great tool for cheaters to use, especially with the 3 strike rule here on PSNProfiles. And I also think that people shouldn’t have the ability to hide a game they “never started”...they landed on the profile for a reason. It’s great having opinions though isn’t it?

Edited May 3, 2021 by HoorayForTyler

[Deadly_Ha_Ha]

2 minutes ago, BGriff1986 said:

You don’t have to be a hardcore trophy hunter to care about your stats. When you have very few platinums each one is “special” so I can see how it would sting that two of them sit around the 55% mark

Maybe, but you can see that a person gets the plat. If they don't care to go for the 100% then they still have their platinum emblem next to the game list. No need to alter the site and the metric for completion just because that's not good enough

[technole]

There are handful of games that require DLC to even platinum, and the practice still continues to this day in some niche games. You can look up the threads here on PSNp for those games and discussion months ago.

 

This is because of live-supported game era where patches and DLC can also affect the base game, and may have made previous trophy requirements obsolete.

 

[Iker_01]

24 minutes ago, visvoer18 said:

I dont care how long a dlc is it could be 500 hours for all i care if it isnt in the maingame no mather the reason it shouldnt excist plain and simple

 

Why shouldn't it exist? What is so plain and simple about it?

[visvoer18]

3 minutes ago, Iker_01 said:

 

Why shouldn't it exist? What is so plain and simple about it?

because it should have been in the maingame

 

 if you feel the need to add dlc you are saying your game wasnt finished and therefore shouldnt have come out yet

[BGriff1986]

2 minutes ago, visvoer18 said:

because it should have been in the maingame

 

 if you feel the need to add dlc you are saying your game wasnt finished and therefore shouldnt have come out yet

It’s somewhat ironic that you’ve taken many posts to fully express your objection to people not getting things 100% right first time... :’)

 

Out of interest, what’s your stance on sequels? If creating DLC is a sign of failure and/or greed then surely they’re an even more heinous crime

[visvoer18]

Just now, BGriff1986 said:

It’s somewhat ironic that you’ve taken many posts to fully express your objection to people not getting things 100% right first time... :’)

 

Out of interest, what’s your stance on sequels? If creating DLC is a sign of failure and/or greed then surely they’re an even more heinous crime

nope those are new games its only logical if your game is done you start on the next prooject either a sequel or another franchise

 

and if they feel they have some cool deas that would fit in a game  use it on a sequel instead

 

if you buy a game you should be able to expect to have a complete product if there is dlc you bought an incomplete product its like buying a  puzzle in a way  you get 950 out of 1000 pieces if you want the final 50 you have to buy them seperatly

[Iker_01]

Just now, visvoer18 said:

because it should have been in the maingame

 

 if you feel the need to add dlc you are saying your game wasnt finished and therefore shouldnt have come out yet

 

That's incredibly short-sighted. Blood and Wine had nothing to do with the main campaign, why should it be part of the main game? It is an expansion pack, which have been a loved part of gaming for years. Different name, same concept. Prey's Mooncrash added a totally different experience, tangentially related to the main game's plot.

 

Some DLCs are an afterthought. Some DLCs couldn't even happen until later, for numerous reasons.

 

Borderlands 2 had a DLC to link it to the sequel, many years after it was released. It should've been part of the main game? Are we time-travelling now?

 

Arkham Knight got a DLC with the Batmobile from a film that did not even exist when the game was released.

 

Control got a DLC featuring elements of Alan Wake, a game IP they did not own until after the game was released.

 

Can you see why your opinion is completely bonkers?

 

You don't like DLCs? That's fine. That's subjective and totally respectable. But vilifying the whole practice is absurd.

[DaivRules]

1 minute ago, visvoer18 said:

its like buying a  puzzle in a way  you get 950 out of 1000 pieces if you want the final 50 you have to buy them seperatly

 

If the 950 piece puzzle form a complete picture on their own and the extra 50 make a larger picture, I don't see anything wrong with that and wouldn't consider the 950 piece puzzle incomplete.

[Iker_01]

2 minutes ago, visvoer18 said:

nope those are new games its only logical if your game is done you start on the next prooject either a sequel or another franchise

 

and if they feel they have some cool deas that would fit in a game  use it on a sequel instead

 

if you buy a game you should be able to expect to have a complete product if there is dlc you bought an incomplete product its like buying a  puzzle in a way  you get 950 out of 1000 pieces if you want the final 50 you have to buy them seperatly

 

Incorrect analogy. The correct analogy, except for games that blatantly cut content from the game (Asura's Wrath, Mass Effect 3, Dragon Age: Origins), would be buying a puzzle, then the company releasing a second puzzle that goes right next to the first puzzle, using similar elements. If you decide to purchase only the first puzzle, you still have the full puzzle. If you decide to buy the second puzzle, you've got a bigger puzzle.

[visvoer18]

1 minute ago, Iker_01 said:

 

That's incredibly short-sighted. Blood and Wine had nothing to do with the main campaign, why should it be part of the main game? It is an expansion pack, which have been a loved part of gaming for years. Different name, same concept. Prey's Mooncrash added a totally different experience, tangentially related to the main game's plot.

 

Some DLCs are an afterthought. Some DLCs couldn't even happen until later, for numerous reasons.

 

Borderlands 2 had a DLC to link it to the sequel, many years after it was released. It should've been part of the main game? Are we time-travelling now?

 

Arkham Knight got a DLC with the Batmobile from a film that did not even exist when the game was released.

 

Control got a DLC featuring elements of Alan Wake, a game IP they did not own until after the game was released.

 

Can you see why your opinion is completely bonkers?

 

You don't like DLCs? That's fine. That's subjective and totally respectable. But vilifying the whole practice is absurd.

no its not  even if dlc is made afterwards  if I buy that game and later they made dlc for it I have an incomplete product  had I known that beforehand I wouldnt have bought it  yet I didnt know and as a result have an incomplete product  in a way i would coonsider the product broken

 

then your borderlands 2 dlc thing they shouldnt have made that or made it some sort of prelude in borderlands 3 (assuming that dlc  connects to 3)

 

but like I said exceptions do excist I am just talking in general for the most part.

 

anyway if you add stuff to the game after release  cut or not your saying to all the buyers who bought your product hey sorry man you dont have the complete product anymore we can fix that for you if you just pay us more.

 

@DaivRules if you add something people who dont own it dont have it complete  anymore  its that simple.

[Zephrese]

6 minutes ago, visvoer18 said:

if you add something people who dont own it dont have it complete  anymore  its that simple.

 

Clearly it isn't "that simple" if a majority of people aren't agreeing with you, and listing out paragraph after paragraph as to why you're wrong.

 

Your mental gymnastics don't count as legitimate criticisms if most of them only apply to you either, mind you, not to mention the word vomit from you has become tiring to read.

Edited May 3, 2021 by Zephrese

[visvoer18]

Just now, Zephrese said:

 

Clearly it isn't "that simple" if a majority of people aren't agreeing with you and listing out paragraph after paragraph as to why you're wrong. Mental gymnastics don't count.

lol if you consider it good or bad thats an oppinion

 

but that you dont have a complete product anymore is sheer fact  so yes it is that simple

[Zephrese]

6 minutes ago, visvoer18 said:

lol if you consider it good or bad thats an oppinion

 

but that you dont have a complete product anymore is sheer fact  so yes it is that simple

 

Nice dodging. ; )

 

Regardless, I don't see how the ethics of DLC and the inner machinations of corporations is at all relevant to people just having severe OCD and wanting to be spoiled for it.

Edited May 3, 2021 by Zephrese

[Deadly_Ha_Ha]

7 minutes ago, visvoer18 said:

lol if you consider it good or bad thats an oppinion

 

but that you dont have a complete product anymore is sheer fact  so yes it is that simple

The complete product was likely the base game. You bought what there was on-launch and you had the complete package. You don't get what you had taken away, you just are given a choice as to buying into further content. You didn't have to buy the main game, you don't have to buy the dlc. Some companies are scummier than others but dlc on the whole can't be held responsible for that. Stop playing any game made by companies with a track record of dlc's if you'd otherwise not have bought them had you known dlc's were coming. Or maybe just stop playing games if the business side of the industry is so grotesque to you.

[MaeveWileyy_]

I don't mind DLC trophies in most cases, yes they lower your completion but they're usually cheap and quite fast to finish. The singular exception to this is trophies that are much, much harder and/or time-consuming than the main game. Even worse when they add a DLC trophy that is time-consuming, hard, and online with a huge amount of luck with the RNG.

For example;

GTA V- Doomsday heist

Dantes Inferno- St Lucia

All the Arkham games

All Call of Duty/Battlefield games

Last Of Us- MP DLC

Uncharted 3- 250 MP wins

[Iker_01]

2 minutes ago, MaeveWileyy_ said:

I don't mind DLC trophies in most cases, yes they lower your completion but they're usually cheap and quite fast to finish. The singular exception to this is trophies that are much, much harder and/or time-consuming than the main game. Even worse when they add a DLC trophy that is time-consuming, hard, and online with a huge amount of luck with the RNG.

For example;

GTA V- Doomsday heist

Dantes Inferno- St Lucia

All the Arkham games

All Call of Duty/Battlefield games

Last Of Us- MP DLC

Uncharted 3- 250 MP wins

 

So DLC trophies are fine as long as they are... easy? What is the point of trophies if people just want them to be participation medals? Platinums have been debased enough as it is.

[visvoer18]

12 minutes ago, Zephrese said:

 

Nice dodging. ; )

 

Regardless, I don't see how the ethics of DLC and the inner machinations of corporations is at all relevant to people just having severe OCD and wanting to be spoiled for it.

yeah we went a bit off topic here lol it was meant for trophies and what I meant wasnt just trophies but more the ethics of dlc in general trophies or not

 

so lets go back on topic lol we got sidetracked.

 

@Deadly_Ha_Ha like I said I wnat to go back ot but I do wanna add that i dont knoe beforehand I get an incomplete product if they say it gets dlc down the line I would at the verry least know I am getting an incomplete product

[DrBloodmoney]

56 minutes ago, visvoer18 said:

because it should have been in the maingame

 

 if you feel the need to add dlc you are saying your game wasnt finished and therefore shouldnt have come out yet

You must have a hell of time when you go to a restaurant.

 

”Would you care for a dessert, sir?”

 

”How dare you! You want to add a sticky toffee pudding now, and expect me to pay for it?! Ridiculous! If you wanted to sell me that, you should have included it on the main plate - plopped right here on the top of my steak and potatoes!”

 

Edited May 3, 2021 by DrBloodmoney

[dieselmanchild]

43 minutes ago, visvoer18 said:

because it should have been in the maingame

 

 if you feel the need to add dlc you are saying your game wasnt finished and therefore shouldnt have come out yet

This has always been my gripe with DLCs. Out of all the games I’ve played and bought DLC for, I can only think of a couple off the top of my head (The Witcher 3, Bloodborne etc.) that were actually so well done and different than the main game that it completely justified the purchase price, and felt very fulfilling to complete.

 

The vast majority of DLC I’ve bought ends up feeling like filler content that was held back from the main game for the express purpose of milking extra dollars out of players a few months after release. A lot of DLC just feels plain lazy and uninspired, and doesn’t add anything new to the experience, it only elongates it.
 

Being a trophy hunter makes it extra annoying too, as I often feel obligated or pressured to waste a bunch of extra cash on DLC just to feel like I actually completed the game. As time goes on, I’ve stopped caring so much and will often leave games incomplete if the DLC doesn’t look worth it, but the completionist part of me is still a little bothered.

 

The majority of the player base (and trophy hunters too) seem to love DLCs and can’t throw their money at them fast enough. But personally, it annoys me that this business model has become the standard. I’d rather just pay a bit more for the base game that feels like a full experience with nothing held back.

[MaeveWileyy_]

12 minutes ago, Iker_01 said:

 

So DLC trophies are fine as long as they are... easy? What is the point of trophies if people just want them to be participation medals? Platinums have been debased enough as it is.

Not that they're easy, just not hard enough for the DLC to be 3-4 levels higher in difficulty or take 100+ hours longer than the base game. Should be kept at the same difficulty as the base game.

[visvoer18]

12 minutes ago, DrBloodmoney said:

You must have a hell of time when you go to a restaurant.

 

”Would you care for a dessert, sir?”

 

”How dare you! You want to add a sticky toffee pudding now, and expect me to pay for it?! Ridiculous! If you wanted to sell me that, you should have included it on the main plate - plopped right here on the top of my steak and potatoes!”

 

lol terrible example  but at least it was funny:)

[Deadly_Ha_Ha]

11 minutes ago, MaeveWileyy_ said:

Not that they're easy, just not hard enough for the DLC to be 3-4 levels higher in difficulty or take 100+ hours longer than the base game. Should be kept at the same difficulty as the base game.

I don't agree with this. Well, for the most part I do, but in specific cases an increase in difficulty was just what the doctor ordered. Kingdom Hearts 3 was so stupidly easy that the plat felt entirely dissatisfying. When the dlc released, along with Critical Mode which was thankfully a free update, the game became more challenging by a factor of 100 and the trophies actually felt like an achievement to get. I may not love dlc as it's released but a lot of the time you'll find those dlc's being released as bundles for cheaper down the line. It may not be "consumer friendly" but gaming has become more of a bargain hunt the last 10 years than anything

[TheSleepyBeauty]

3 hours ago, visvoer18 said:

because it should have been in the maingame

 

 if you feel the need to add dlc you are saying your game wasnt finished and therefore shouldnt have come out yet

Guess that means Uncharted 4 is an incomplete game because they added dlc trophies to the multiplayer. Oh no! but what about the games that added dlc for newgame+?!  Guess those games are incomplete too! What shall we do?! SHAME ON THEM! 

Edited May 3, 2021 by TheSleepyBeauty

[visvoer18]

44 minutes ago, TheSleepyBeauty said:

Guess that means Uncharted 4 is an incomplete game because they added dlc trophies to the multiplayer. Oh no! but what about the games that added dlc for newgame+?!  Guess those games are incomplete too! What shall we do?! SHAME ON THEM! 

depends  was the mp itself part of the game when it came out yes or no? if the answer is yes    it wasnt incomplete if the mp was added later  it is an incomplete game.

 

altough in general I consider mp a bit of a grey area since that requires servers as well when servers die  there is no point to the mp anymore unless you have a bot mode and can play against bots

 

and games that add new game plus later

 

yes those are incomplete  because thats pretty much the same thing capcom does with selling cheats as dlc

 

just like in some gamesw you have to freaking buy other difficulties etc

 

also you have a realy shitty attitude so this is my first and last response to you  because you already annoy me with your condescending tone