Why are they doing this? Platinum rant.

[Sicho]

1 minute ago, xZoneHunter said:

RPGs have always had missable content, it's basically ingrained in the genre i'd say. Branching paths, optional quests, different classes or just in general exploring stuff off the beaten path. And when it's done good, it's fun to replay to revisit area's you haven't explored in your first run. It's exactly why people are still playing skyrim. If you really believe what you just said you should stick with linear games. No shame it that, we all like different things.

 

"Missable" content as in you can only play one of five classes at a time or can only experience one story branch at a time is different from "punishing" the player because he made a specific choice or because he failed to look behind a barrel at some point and then the game makes it impossible to go back there.

Have multiple classes, story branches and so on. That's fun. Tying trophies to playing every single one of the classes (like D2R) or only netting trophies to players who pick very specific dialogue choices (like Witcher 3) - not as much fun IMO and again, I think it's bad design. And I get it that this is only important to people who care about trophies and not for the general gaming public but we are here to talk about trophies, right?

 

And this is worse the bigger a game is. Witcher 3 is fucking huge and only making the platinum available for players who play this huge game in a very specific way instead of letting them have their free choices just rubs me the wrong way. If you don't play with a guide, you could potentially replay the game many times and still not figure out why the fuck you don't get all the Gwent cards. Missables like that, IMO, are generally bad but even more so if it's super obscure and, to add insult to injury, retrying to get it right means dozens of hours of replaying for each retry.

I generally like choice and if you are a player that likes trophies and a game tells you you need to play through it with every class at least once to get the trophies, or you have to do things a certain way, it robs you of said choice.

You could for example you can have a game with multiple endings (thus giving the player freedom of choice during gameplay) and simply have a trophy for simply reaching one ending instead of having a trophy for each individual ending.

In the case of ER, instead of having three ending trophies (which can be save scummed anyway, so what's the point?) have only one and then replace the other two for different trophies for any other of the many different things this game and its design enables the player to do that could be fun and challenging? Just to be clear, this is just an example of how they could have approached their trophy design, I am NOT advocating for them to retroactively change their trophies

I simply would have preferred only one ending trophy instead of three and in their place having two more boss trophies or something ridiculous and hard to do (like killing a troll barehanded or something silly like that ) I would also have preferred collection trophies only for stuff that is not missable and again, they could have put in a plethora of other things to do as a trophy instead. I'm not "super mad" that they did it as they did it, but I'm a bit annoyed about it because I personally think that the alternative would be more fun, more creative, and simply better.

17 minutes ago, Timo425 said:

I think missable items or content in a game is totally fine and even commendable (depending on the game), but I personally don't like if a game has many missable trophies that need 10 tabs of guides open at all times to keep track of. What I mean is that the missable stuff doesn't necessarily need to be tied to trophies. That's just me though, I can deal with it. But it is nicer to just play a game and not worry about all the missables so much, I think games have got better about it over time and its really only an issue with longer games that have very tight windows for missables.

 

I agree with your whole post.

[Sicho]

7 minutes ago, Gladiator995 said:

I wish people wouldn’t keep asking to be spoon fed with every aspect of video games nowadays. These “easy difficulty” modes people were calling for this game, it’s an embarrassment. If you keep dying at a certain boss or genuinely suck at the game, take the wise old wisdom approach to Souls games and “Git Gud”. What happened to the idea of facing a challenge in a game head on.

 

Missables are usually not a challenge. "Choose dialogue option A instead of B" is not a challenge. Having to replay a whole game to get back to the dialogue option and then choose A is not a challenge, but it is hugely annoying and unnecessarily disrespectful to a gamer's time. Nobody (in here) is asking for ER to become an "easy game". But putting missables in huge games generally feels like a "fuck you and your free time" message from the devs to their customers.

 

It has nothing to do with being good at a game or facing challenges. It has all to do with robbing the player of freedom in a game because only a specific way of playing the game "is the right way" to get a trophy instead of enabling the trophies for all kinds of playstyles.

 

Imagine the uproar if you could only get the trophies in ER with magic builds and every other build would be locked out of the trophies. Don't you think people would be upset because they would feel "forced" to play a mage? (unless they don't care about trophies, but again, we are on a trophy website  )

Is it not only fair then to assume that there are also people who dislike the idea that NPC XYZ needs to be killed at a specific point in the game or that you have to do this and then that and then that to get a trophy and when you don't do this and that at a specific point, you'll have to replay the game if you want the trophy? It's again "forcing" those that care about the trophies to play a certain way or replay (potentially) many times.

 

It seems that ER is now not as bad in this regard as initially feared but no missable stuff and letting the player enjoy their freedom instead of pushing them towards very specific styles of play is not optimal IMO. As far as I know, for one of the legendaries, one of the NPCs must be killed. What if you are a role-player and wanted to play without killing any NPCs? Not a choice if you care for the trophies unless you play as you want to play first and then replay again. (and again, replaying a game is not a fun thing to do for some people as they perceive it as a waste of time) The better option (as in the more "consumer friendly" option) would be to not tie missable stuff (if there needs to be missable stuff included at all in the game, which is another whole discussion about game design and yadda yadda) to the trophies so that no matter how you like to play the game (again, nothing difficulty related here), you would not be punished for doing so.

[Lowlliet]

22 minutes ago, Sicho said:

 

Missables are usually not a challenge. "Choose dialogue option A instead of B" is not a challenge. Having to replay a whole game to get back to the dialogue option and then choose A is not a challenge, but it is hugely annoying and unnecessarily disrespectful to a gamer's time. Nobody (in here) is asking for ER to become an "easy game". But putting missables in huge games generally feels like a "fuck you and your free time" message from the devs to their customers.

 

It has nothing to do with being good at a game or facing challenges. It has all to do with robbing the player of freedom in a game because only a specific way of playing the game "is the right way" to get a trophy instead of enabling the trophies for all kinds of playstyles.

 

Imagine the uproar if you could only get the trophies in ER with magic builds and every other build would be locked out of the trophies. Don't you think people would be upset because they would feel "forced" to play a mage? (unless they don't care about trophies, but again, we are on a trophy website  )

Is it not only fair then to assume that there are also people who dislike the idea that NPC XYZ needs to be killed at a specific point in the game or that you have to do this and then that and then that to get a trophy and when you don't do this and that at a specific point, you'll have to replay the game if you want the trophy? It's again "forcing" those that care about the trophies to play a certain way or replay (potentially) many times.

 

It seems that ER is now not as bad in this regard as initially feared but no missable stuff and letting the player enjoy their freedom instead of pushing them towards very specific styles of play is not optimal IMO. As far as I know, for one of the legendaries, one of the NPCs must be killed. What if you are a role-player and wanted to play without killing any NPCs? Not a choice if you care for the trophies unless you play as you want to play first and then replay again. (and again, replaying a game is not a fun thing to do for some people as they perceive it as a waste of time) The better option (as in the more "consumer friendly" option) would be to not tie missable stuff (if there needs to be missable stuff included at all in the game, which is another whole discussion about game design and yadda yadda) to the trophies so that no matter how you like to play the game (again, nothing difficulty related here), you would not be punished for doing so.

You know that trophies/achievements aren’t meant to be for everyone, right? Just as you can’t win a trophy in a sports tournament, if you can’t win against other players (= challenges), you won’t get a trophy in a videogame if you won’t meet the requirements for it. Simple as that. Every game has its own rules just as every sport has. And if you break one or more rules, f.e. won’t pick up certain object or talk to an NPC in the right moment, you fail. Try again. 
 

Don’t act like you’re entitled for everything. World doesn’t work like that. And, honestly, trophies wouldn’t really be fun without challenges.  

Edited March 7, 2022 by Lowlliet

[Sicho]

1 minute ago, Lowlliet said:

Don’t act like you’re entitled for everything. World doesn’t work like that. And, honestly, trophies wouldn’t really be fun without challenges.  

 

but missables ARE NOT challenging!!!! aaaaaahhhhhh!!!

 

What the fuck is actually challenging about f.ex. having to kill Madman Lugos in Witcher 3 before he becomes unavailable? Fucking nothing! The fight would be the same if you could do it later in the game. There is no challenge in forcing the player to do it before a specific point in time! There is no skill required for that, only knowledge about the fact that he becomes unavailable at some point and that you better kill him ASAP. That IS NOT a challenge!

Having to beat him naked and barehanded with a Guitar Hero controller, that would be a challenge  

[DaivRules]

I like missable stuff with consequences in large games and prefer to think of the decisions as intentional, rather than “bad” in the aspect that they’re poor developers. Even when they come to trophies. Maybe especially when they come to trophies. 
 

So what is some people get upset? They’re allowed to be if they want to choose to be. Just as developers are allowed to choose to put in seemingly contrived hurdles into games. It’s their call. People are free to decide it’s not for them and skip it, vent about it online, play it and enjoy it, whatever they want. 
 

We live in a time where people can largely read through and practically know everything about even some of the largest games before or very shortly after they’re released. Being an informed consumer has never been easier or more accessible. When it comes to video games, that’s going to mean venting no matter what decision any developer makes. In this case, it also means trusting the original source of information which ended up painting a much worse picture of things, which caused the uproar over not very much of an issue. I would like to say that should show people who want to put information out there that they have a responsibility to be more accurate with the information, but let’s all acknowledge that it’s just a race to publish first, no matter the quality, and people clamor for even more of it so it’s going to continue to happen because it’s every easy to cater to the lowest common denominator, and that’s always a large crowd. 
 

It’s okay to appreciate different people like or dislike different design decisions in video games, without needing to establish that one way is right and another is wrong. 

[DeathlessVoid]

1 minute ago, Sicho said:

 

but missables ARE NOT challenging!!!! aaaaaahhhhhh!!!

 

 

I beg to differ. There are plenty of missable trophies that ARE challenging, and not just because the trophy is missable but because the content that gets locked out is challenging.

[Sicho]

1 minute ago, DeathlessVoid said:

 

I beg to differ. There are plenty of missable trophies that ARE challenging, and not just because the trophy is missable but because the content that gets locked out is challenging.

 

the content would still be challenging without the need of it being locked out at some point, no?

They could simply make the content not missable and still require it to be played for a trophy. I really don't see the point of stuff being missable anymore at this stage in my life  If you design a hard boss fight for a Souls game, why make it missable? Many players won't see your hard work and if you tie trophies to it, you annoy those who want to collect trophies but would prefer playing games without guides and fear of missing out on trophies. I can't see a "win" in there anywhere.

5 minutes ago, DaivRules said:

We live in a time where people can largely read through and practically know everything about even some of the largest games before or very shortly after they’re released. Being an informed consumer has never been easier or more accessible.

 

I would prefer to play games without prior knowledge and without guides but as soon as I know that there is missable stuff in it, I really feel compelled to inform myself because I absolutely dislike the idea of having to replay a game, no matter how good the game is.

Not having missables would make my gaming experience more fun because I could play without worrying that I might mess up at some point or without having to check and then check again to make sure that I really did everything I should do before progressing. The alternative would be not giving a shit about trophies - which I do for many games, just check out my profile. But when it's a game (series) that I absolutely adore, I really want to get the trophies if possible because of my love for the game but at the same time, I simply don't want to replay games, even if I love them. There#s too much love to spread around to concentrate most of it on a single game multiple times

[DrBloodmoney]

21 minutes ago, Sicho said:

Having to replay a whole game to get back to the dialogue option and then choose A is not a challenge, but it is hugely annoying and unnecessarily disrespectful to a gamer's time.

 

21 minutes ago, Sicho said:

putting missables in huge games generally feels like a "fuck you and your free time" message from the devs to their customers.

 

Why would a developer be expected to try to cater to someone who values their "free time" more than time spent playing the game they are making?

Isn't their whole job is to make a game that people will enjoy playing more than they enjoy not playing it?

 

I mean... surely if a person's "free time" is more valuable to them to them than time spent playing a game, then they should just not buy the game in the first place?

Not playing it would be the ideal way to maximise their "free time", after all? 

 

I guess it's just kinda baffling to me that someone would shell out full price for a game that specifically sells itself on it's scope and size and obtuseness of narrative, then complain at every turn that they might have to spend a lot of time playing it to get the trophies - or feel the need to refer to guides, or save-scumming endings, just to make sure they don't have to play the game any more than the minimum possible amount. ?

 

Being respectful of the player's time isn't just about wrapping up the game in the minimum number of playthroughs.

 

I see Elden Ring as being extremely respectful of my time - in the sense that every single time I load it up, and give it my time, it has rewarded me with more and more unusual or interesting content, and has continued to unravel and go deeper and deeper, showing me new stuff every hour.

 

It rewards me for playing - it gives me new things constantly, in exchange for my time - and so I'm happy to keep giving it lots of it.

That, to me, is far more "respectful of my time" than most games manage.

 

If simply finishing a platinum list as fast as possible was a problem, there are games out there to cater:

https://psnprofiles.com/search?q=zippy the circle

 

 

[Thomas2400]

Probably going to buy this game today (or soon at least) so haven't played and can't comment on the missable trophies in it put in general I dislike any missables in open world games

 

The entire nature of an open world game is you play your own way and make your own choices, going left at one point will lead to a different experience than going right, so having missable trophies that mean you have to follow a set path is stupid to me 

 

That said I've gotten used to it and will now tend to just do a first playthrough and not worry about trophies and see what I have left and if I'm interested in going for them before starting a second playthrough 

 

[Timo425]

3 minutes ago, DrBloodmoney said:

 

 

Why would a developer be expected to try to cater to someone who values their "free time" more than time spent playing the game they are making?

Isn't their whole job is to make a game that people will enjoy playing more than they enjoy not playing it?

 

I mean... surely if a person's "free time" is more valuable to them to them than time spent playing a game, then they should just not buy the game in the first place?

Not playing it would be the ideal way to maximise their "free time", after all? 

 

I guess it's just kinda baffling to me that someone would shell out full price for a game that specifically sells itself on it's scope and size and obtuseness of narrative, then complain at every turn that they might have to spend a lot of time playing it to get the trophies - or feel the need to refer to guides, or save-scumming endings, just to make sure they don't have to play the game any more than the minimum possible amount. ?

Developers can make the game however they want and we can state our opinion however they want. It's not like developers always know everything either, sometimes they just don't care about trophies or deliberately put obscure trophies as a design choice. But I'm not sure why we should just assume that developers are fully aware of trophies and are deliberately making it annoying to get some trophies. I'd say sometimes they just don't know/care. I'd say they even lose on sales if they make trophies very hard to get, but that's just a guess.

 

Nevertheless your post seems to bog down to "my opinion aligns with that of developers and your opinion is different, therefore you are not allowed to state your opinion."

 

Quote

Isn't their whole job is to make a game that people will enjoy playing more than they enjoy not playing it?

What does this have to do with anything?

 

Quote

I mean... surely if a person's "free time" is more valuable to them to them than time spent playing a game, then they should just not buy the game in the first place?

Sure, choose to not play it and also state their opinion on a forum that they find the particular trophies annoying. You have a problem with that?

 

Quote

I guess it's just kinda baffling to me that someone would shell out full price for a game that specifically sells itself on it's scope and size and obtuseness of narrative, then complain at every turn that they might have to spend a lot of time playing it to get the trophies - or feel the need to refer to guides, or save-scumming endings, just to make sure they don't have to play the game any more than the minimum possible amount.

It sounds like you are talking about someone and something specific, seeing these specific conditions. First, they already bought the game (condition 1), the game needs to sell itself (2), they complain at every turn (3), they don't want to play the game the minimum possible amount (4). I have to ask, who are you talking about and are you talking about ER specifically? Otherwise I fail to see the point in such a specific situation.

[Sicho]

13 minutes ago, DrBloodmoney said:

Why would a developer be expected to try to cater to someone who values their "free time" more than time spent playing the game they are making?

Isn't their whole job is to make a game that people will enjoy playing more than they enjoy not playing it?

 

the job of a game is to make my free time enjoyable. If I don't enjoy multiple playthroughs, but otherwise love the game itself, "forcing" me to do multiple playthroughs puts a damper on my enjoyment. It should be my personal choice if I want to play a game more than once. If you don't care about trophies, it is. If you do care, however, you don't often have a choice, other than reverting to not caring about them  Which is, more often than not, what I do. But it's also a shame because I like collecting trophies.

 

Also, as I explained before, replaying a game feels like a waste of time for me because it does not give "me new things constantly, in exchange for my time" but only gives me something I already experienced before. I don't watch Jurassic Park twice in a row even though it's my favorite movie.

And why should developers care how often I play their game? They got my money, it doesn't matter if I play ER for only an hour or for 200 hours, they got their compensation.

But it's also a cultural thing, I suppose. It seems to me that multiple playthroughs and stuff like that seem to be much more common in Japanese games than in Western games. Many big western AAA releases only get an NG+ patched in after the fact as DLC etc. The japanese really like to spent literal months on the same game. I'm the (extreme?) opposite of that, I want to get to play through as many games as possible in my lifetime to experience many different games.

 

Anyhow, it doesn't really amount to anything to repeat the same stuff over and over again in this thread. I'm also not talking for the gaming community or the trophy hunting community or for anyone else, I'm only talking for myself. And my stance stays the same: I don't like missable trophies, I don't like online trophies (not because of the trophy requirement mostly but because of the nature of online and the fact that online modes can become empty or disappear, thus rendering the trophies literally unobtainable) and I don't like multiple playthroughs. And this will not change and I will rant and vent about it when I feel like doing so

[Timo425]

12 minutes ago, Sicho said:

 

the job of a game is to make my free time enjoyable. If I don't enjoy multiple playthroughs, but otherwise love the game itself, "forcing" me to do multiple playthroughs puts a damper on my enjoyment.

ER specifically doesn't seem so bad though. I'm only 22 hours in but based on what I read, the missables are not a big deal in this game.

[Sicho]

Just now, Timo425 said:

ER specifically doesn't seem so bad though. I'm only 22 hours in but based on what I read, the missables are not a big deal in this game.

 

I said the same thing earlier in a post. However, I also think it is a problem that you (and me) felled compelled to look that stuff up at all. If it's a problem on our side and our way to tackle games or if it's a problem because the game has missables, that's basically the debate here  I blame the missables because without them, I wouldn't look up anything  

[Timo425]

Just now, Sicho said:

 

I said the same thing earlier in a post. However, I also think it is a problem that you (and me) felled compelled to look that stuff up at all. If it's a problem on our side and our way to tackle games or if it's a problem because the game has missables, that's basically the debate here  I blame the missables because without them, I wouldn't look up anything  

You can finish the game completely blind and wrap it up on ng+ by rushing to missable spots. Someone correct me if i'm wrong.

Personally i don't have a problem with following guides on first playthrough, though I prefer not to read the guide from start to finish and go step by step.

[AJ_Radio]

6 hours ago, notandrebraun said:

I agree with you. Unfortunately, the proud would rather elevate themselves above others and diminish them. It's the comparison of rarity with trophies that makes them proud — the pleasure of feeling above the rest.

 

I couldn't care less how many ultra rares someone has or how fast someone finished a game. The fact that I've been on these forums for several years and there are still people who try to tell me I don't know jack about how some others treat trophies is just bollocks.

 

To further @MonaSaxPaynes response, I can find decade old posts on people giving on up on the Vanquish platinum because Challenge 6 is too hard. And that's the thing. People shouldn't be overly entitled to a platinum. Even without the challenges, I still would of loved Vanquish. Probably one of the best tactical third person shooters that I ever played.

 

3 hours ago, Sicho said:

not having missables is not making it easier, as missables aren't hard! But they are annoying because you need to know stuff beforehand or be extremely lucky! There is no skill involved! How is that so hard to understand?

 

They are just there to ARTIFICIALLY stretch playtime! Because if you have to replay something, you are not doing something cool and exciting or something challenging, you are just repeating something you already did before. For me, that's boring, unnecessary shit. I love Dark Souls but I never made it through an NG+ because as soon as I start NG+, I'm bored about 5 minutes in - because I already know everything that's coming! It's much more fun to me, at that point, to simply start another game and experience something new.

 

If you like spending your time doing the same shit over and over again - great, more power to you. That being said, some people don't like doing that and they have a right to rant when a game they actually love has missables and either needs them to be super lucky or they have to look up shit or to forget about getting the platinum. And again, it's not about handing out free trophies, there are a plethora of ways to put hard, challenging trophies in a game without resorting to cheap, annoying shit like "replay our game three times" or "find every little thing that we put in an area that won't be accessible after a while without warning you beforehand" etc. It is actually bad design and one of the worst examples of this kind of design is titles where the "hard" difficulty only becomes available after you played through once. Why the fuck can it not simply be available right away? There is literally no reason to do that other than artificially pushing the players to spent more time with a title than would be necessary. Developers that do that don't respect their customer's time.

 

And as you get older, that time becomes more and more precious.

 

I can't even pretend I'm one of the oldest people on these forums. There are plenty of people much older than me here who have been gaming since the 1980s, and do love trophies.

 

And again, I must come to say that if you're not willing to take the time to earn some trophies or any trophy, then you don't deserve them. That Dark Souls platinum wasn't for you. I spent 80 hours on it, and I loved every minute that I played.

 

Right now you're just making stupid excuses, or try to state that some requirements should be changed because "I can't handle playing the same game several times".

 

You just want easy shit. That's all I'm getting from you. Oh no, Elden Ring is too long and time consuming.

 

Fine. You don't deserve that platinum. And using the age thing as simply saying you just don't have enough time is pathetic.

Edited March 7, 2022 by AJ_Radio

[Sicho]

5 minutes ago, AJ_Radio said:

Oh no, Elden Ring is too long and time consuming.

 

I'm not saying that.

What I'm saying is that playing the same game twice is not worth it. It's as simple as that.

Resident Evil 8 can be platted with several playthroughs in fewer hours than the hours I put in Elden Ring on the first day I started playing ER. Still, I don't have done the plat in Resi8 because why the fuck would I replay the game? I already experienced it, it's done and ticked off. time for the next new shit

 

It doesn't matter if it's a 200h game or a 1h game - once I played through it, my interest is practically gone immediately.

However, in the rare case that I feel compelled to replay a game for a trophy, it is of course much more pleasant to replay a short game than a huge epic. Has nothing to do with it being "easier" ("You just want easy shit") but it's simply less frustrating. (because for me, replaying causes frustration because I always have the feeling I could do something "better" with my time)

 

As I said before, I don't watch Jurassic Park twice in a row*, even though I love the movie. And yes, when I would watch it a second time I might spot a detail or two I missed before. But the bulk of my time would not be spent with that "new detail" but with stuff I already experienced. My time is too valuable for that, there's a huge amount of movies I have not seen yet, better spent my time with those. Replaying a whole bunch of a game just for a sword or something - Nah, not for me. I prefer to invest the said amount of my limited time on this planet into new experiences instead of doing the same shit over and over again for bragging rights.

 

Again, my goal is to go through as many games as possible in my life. And while doing that, I want to accumulate platinum trophies. If games have ridiculous trophy requirements like 700 playthroughs or missable shit, fuck the trophies. I move on and do something else. However, no one can forbid me to rant about that and say that it's annoying and frustrating that some devs include stuff like that. Because it's a shame that a fan of a game, who loves it dearly, maybe even bought a super expensive collector edition to support the devs, will buy the DLC, recommends it to everybody and fucking enjoys the game is then locked out of a platinum trophy because basically, they decided that his playstyle is "not worthy" and that you need to play through it multiple times or that you have to play a certain way to not miss something. It sucks.

 

Someone brought Skyrim up at one point in this thread. Skyrim also has missables unfortunately, but they did one thing right: you can get the Civil War trophies, no matter which side you choose to be on! Would this be a FromSoftware game, they would basically ask you to play through it twice, once on each side of the war. This would be super unnecessary and a "cheap" way to artificially push people to replay the game more times than - again, my personal opinion - it is worth doing.

 

*of course there are movies that I've seen multiple times. But never "in a row", often there were years between the first time and the second time I watched it. Also, movies are a "snack" compared to the time investment huge video games ask for, so it's not even remotely comparable.

[Timo425]

8 minutes ago, Sicho said:

It doesn't matter if it's a 200h game or a 1h game - once I played through it, my interest is practically gone immediately.

However, in the rare case that I feel compelled to replay a game for a trophy, it is of course much more pleasant to replay a short game than a huge epic. Has nothing to do with it being "easier" ("You just want easy shit") but it's simply less frustrating. (because for me, replaying causes frustration because I always have the feeling I could do something "better" with my time)

It sounds like you have very specific needs:

1) Play games only once, no exceptions

2) Play games blind with no guide, to fully enjoy them.

3) Get plat or 100% in all these games.

 

I'm sure you understand that all 3 conditions at once are too specific to realistically expect it from developers, replay value is a real thing and too many people are into it. There is no point in demanding devs to cater to these specific needs of yours, one of those 3 conditions need to give. Or be doomed to enjoy only a small fractions of games out there.

Edited March 7, 2022 by Timo425

[Sicho]

45 minutes ago, Timo425 said:

I'm sure you understand that all 3 conditions at once are too specific to realistically expect it from developers, replay value is a real thing and too many people are into it. There is no point in demanding devs to cater to these specific needs of yours, one of those 3 conditions need to give. Or be doomed to enjoy only a small fractions of games out there.

 

I'm not a trophy hunter, I'm a gamer. The only reason I only care about platinum trophies is that I'm in a friendly competition with a friend, who has slightly more plats than I do and I want to catch up on him   I don't really care about achievements on Xbox or Steam or Mobile. If you look here https://www.exophase.com/user/Sicho/ you will see that there aren't many games where I have completed all the achievements.

 

I won't play a game specifically to get trophies nor am I a person that often goes out of their way to get all the achievements. Because, generally, I don't really care.

But with that being said, I still like the general idea of achievements and trophies. And if the trophy list is well made and doesn't feel like an unnecessary timewaster to me, I go for them.

 

But my reason for trophies might differ from the typical trophy hunter: they usually want bragging rights, show off their skill, or something like that. Or they simply want a 100% profile or whatever. I mostly want platinum for games I love to show off my fandom. I love Mortal Kombat, so I have the plat for X and 11. I'm a huge THPS fan so of course, I had to do the platinum in THPS5, even though that game was not really good.

 

And I love the Soulsbornesekiroring games! And I would love to have the platinum in all of them, not because I think it would make me look like a badass who completed all these hard games but simply because I want to communicate "hey look, these were games that I really liked!" And it's a pity that they have trophy requirements that I personally find super annoying and/or frustrating. Especially since I'm convinced that they could do it differently without hurting the legitimacy and integrity of the games and the platinum trophies. Hell, I would even argue replacing trophies for endings that can be save-scummed for trophies to beat specific super-hard bosses would even make the plats more legitimate for the trophy hunters that are looking for validation of skill! So I don't see how doing that would "hurt" anyone.

 

And that's what I already said very early in this thread: getting rid of missable trophies (and online trophies, except of course for pure multiplayer games etc.) would not take away anything in my opinion. So that's what I ideally would like to see. And that is not me "demanding" to get my specific needs catered, that's me thinking about what an optimal scenario could be to cover as many different "needs" and playstyles as possible - including mine.

 

Let's be honest here, multiple playthroughs - especially if not save-scummable - only cater to a super minority, even amongst trophy hunters. And maybe that's why so many in this thread react aggressively about people wanting missable trophies to be gone because they like the exclusivity of their trophies. But I would argue that there are plenty of games out there with super rare trophies that require pure skill and don't feature any missables, so I don't really see an added value in missable trophies. They are not proof of any type of skill usually but only proof that you had a lot of time. Nothing wrong with wanting your time investment getting validated, but then again, there is also a time counter now on Playstation and you can basically show off how many hours you played a game, is there really a need anymore for trophies that show that you spent more hours on it than the average gamer?

 

Also, while it's true that as soon as I can mark a game as "beaten" on https://backloggery.com/Sicho84 I tend to move on. But I would not say "Play games only once, no exceptions" - there are exceptions. But you know, exceptio probat regulam

Edited March 7, 2022 by Sicho

[ArcadeJedi]

What is going on here? This is a forum where people boost, save scum, glitch and cheat their way to platinum’s at nearly every given opportunity to save time and grind. 

 

The amount of hypocrisy here is ridiculous, just because OP doesn’t want multiple play throughs of a massive open world or the added stress of missing something simple he’s getting shit on? 

[DeathlessVoid]

2 hours ago, Sicho said:

 

Pretty much everything you've said thus far.

 

I'm just gonna be blunt. All of your posts sound the same; "everything should be made specifically for me, to cater to me."

I get your points, but the last time I checked our galaxy was called the Milky Way, not the Sicho way. Not everything revolves around you and your desires.

[JourneySilvers]

13 minutes ago, Sicho said:

 

I'm not a trophy hunter, I'm a gamer. The only reason I only care about platinum trophies is that I'm in a friendly competition with a friend, who has slightly more plats than I do and I want to catch up on him   I don't really care about achievements on Xbox or Steam or Mobile. If you look here https://www.exophase.com/user/Sicho/ you will see that there aren't many games where I have completed all the achievements.

 

I won't play a game specifically to get trophies nor am I a person that often goes out of their way to get all the achievements. Because, generally, I don't really care.

But with that being said, I still like the general idea of achievements and trophies. And if the trophy list is well made and doesn't feel like an unnecessary timewaster to me, I go for them.

 

But my reason for trophies might differ from the typical trophy hunter: they usually want bragging rights, show off their skill, or something like that. Or they simply want a 100% profile or whatever. I mostly want platinum for games I love to show off my fandom. I love Mortal Kombat, so I have the plat for X and 11. I'm a huge THPS fan so of course, I had to do the platinum in THPS5, even though that game was not really good.

 

And I love the Soulsbornesekiroring games! And I would love to have the platinum in all of them, not because I think it would make me look like a badass who completed all these hard games but simply because I want to communicate "hey look, these were games that I really liked!" And it's a pity that they have trophy requirements that I personally find super annoying and/or frustrating. Especially since I'm convinced that they could do it differently without hurting the legitimacy and integrity of the games and the platinum trophies. Hell, I would even argue replacing trophies for endings that can be save-scummed for trophies to beat specific super-hard bosses would even make the plats more legitimate for the trophy hunters that are looking for validation of skill! So I don't see how doing that would "hurt" anyone.

 

And that's what I already said very early in this thread: getting rid of missable trophies (and online trophies, except of course for pure multiplayer games etc.) would not take away anything in my opinion. So that's what I ideally would like to see. And that is not me "demanding" to get my specific needs catered, that's me thinking about what an optimal scenario could be to cover as many different "needs" and playstyles as possible - including mine.

 

Let's be honest here, multiple playthroughs - especially if not save-scummable - only cater to a super minority, even amongst trophy hunters. And maybe that's why so many in this thread react aggressively about people wanting missable trophies to be gone because they like the exclusivity of their trophies. But I would argue that there are plenty of games out there with super rare trophies that require pure skill and don't feature any missables, so I don't really see an added value in missable trophies. They are not proof of any type of skill usually but only proof that you had a lot of time. Nothing wrong with wanting your time investment getting validated, but then again, there is also a time counter now on Playstation and you can basically show off how many hours you played a game, is there really a need anymore for trophies that show that you spent more hours on it than the average gamer?

 

Also, while it's true that as soon as I can mark a game as "beaten" on https://backloggery.com/Sicho84 I tend to move on. But I would not say "Play games only once, no exceptions" - there are exceptions. But you know, exceptio probat regulam

I get your way of playing and there's nothing wrong with it. I'm usually the same way, though in my case I'm just too lazy to finish plats half the time. 

 

I think a lot of what people are disagreeing with you about here is the fact that you don't seem to just be sharing your preferences with us, rather it feels a lot like you're saying every games trophy list SHOULD be changed to fit your play style. And thats what's annoying so many people. Now I know you've just said here that you aren't demanding devs change their lists to suit you and I think that's a good thing to point out. 

 

The only thing I will disagree with you about here, is that I dont think people who like to replay games are as niche of a group as you're thinking they are. People do see a game with missables, or a game that requires multiple playthroughs as challenging. And why? Because it can be a pain in the ass! Lol. But that's why it's fun to many people. The fact that games take commitment and time investment is just a big part of the hobby.

 

And you don't share that same feeling of accomplishment over seeing a time sink commitment through. Again, that's cool. It just isn't cool to imply that they shouldn't get to exist at all, because they cater to people who don't play like you do. 

 

Trophy lists are all different and suit different people. If you don't like a list, don't go for the plat. You can't want all games to be designed around your way of playing, even if you do personally see it as the "best" solution. What suits you best will never be what suits EVERYONE best, so just play your way my guy. Let trophy lists have variety. It's all good at the end of the day, go for the games you love and play until it isn't fun ✌?

[Sicho]

2 minutes ago, JourneySilvers said:

What suits you best will never be what suits EVERYONE best, so just play your way my guy. Let trophy lists have variety. It's all good at the end of the day, go for the games you love and play until it isn't fun

 

well, again, my idea of not having missables in the future anymore will not suit EVERYONE best but I'm pretty sure that it would suit MORE people than the current situation.

I mean I mentioned many examples in this thread already. If you are a pure roleplayer and what to play without killing NPCs (because that's how your PR character is) and you will miss a trophy if you don't kill a specific NPC at some point - bummer. If you are like me and don't like replaying games but there are difficulty trophies but the high difficulties are only available after the first playthrough - bummer. If there are two sides in an in-game war and you have to choose one but the game wants you to play both sides for a trophy instead of sticking to the one that you actually like - bummer. If you want to play a game stealthily but the game also has trophies for playing aggressively - bummer.

 

So these examples of missables cater to the playstyle of replaying games over and over again but not the roleplayers, the ones that don't like replaying games, the ones that prefer a certain playstyle, and so on. Having no missables might not cater to the replayers anymore but it would cater to many more groups than just that one specific group, which is my reasoning for it being the "better" way. The more people are catered to, the better. Nothing wrong with niche games catering to special interest but we are discussing major mainstream releases with massive marketing budgets here, not obscure indie title number 100 - which is also one of the reasons why I find it so funny that so many claim that Elden Ring is so "hardcore" and people should "git gud" etc. - it's a fucking mainstream product, not some game for hardcore elitists. It's way too easy for that anyway  Dark Souls would not have been successful if it would have been as hardcore and niche as some people want to make it out to be.

[totakos1]

Every souls game ( at least that I played ) requires 2-3 or even 4 play throughs we all knew it before the game even came out! You miss something you go for another ending and you get it! Might be annoying for some but it has always been like that! If it is 200 hours to get the platinum then that’s it! NG++ or NG+++ ( looking at Sekiro and Nioh ) it’s not always that easy ( don’t know yet about this one )

[Timo425]

48 minutes ago, Sicho said:

getting rid of missable trophies (and online trophies, except of course for pure multiplayer games etc.) would not take away anything in my opinion.

I disagree, sometimes a trophy is missable purely by the design of the game. You possibly can't do everything in a single playthrough, and also it's good to have some incentive for replay. Is it me or did your narrative change though? You seemed to be talking about easy to miss trophies that add many hours of gameplay if you miss them, but now you seem to want to exterminate any and all missable trophy from existence. These are quite different cases, no?

 

Quote

Let's be honest here, multiple playthroughs - especially if not save-scummable - only cater to a super minority, even amongst trophy hunters.

I disagree, for example I really dislike Resident Evil 3 remake because the game is so barebones and offers next to no replay value, unlike the original. Multiple playthroughs on a game that offers no replay value? Sure, kind of waste of time. Not all games are designed to be a single playthrough play-and-uninstall sort of deals.

 

Quote

And maybe that's why so many in this thread react aggressively about people wanting missable trophies to be gone because they like the exclusivity of their trophies.

Personally I don't think missable trophies by themselves are a bad thing, just bad trophy design is a bigger problem and not specific to this type.

 

You can see trophies as a challenge or as a completionist thing, and while I disagree that all trophies should be simply story related, I agree that annoying or frustrating trophies that require elaborate guides are no fun. But let's talk about ER specifically for a second - lets say the blind playthrough is 100 hours. And missables are lets say extra 15 hours on top of that in ng+. Is it really so bad to go from 100h to 115h, to the extent that you want to call out devs for not making them missable? It's not like you need to play for 100 hours AGAIN. If you really want the plat so bad, putting in some 15%-20% extra hours isn't a bad thing in my book. It seems to be your own mental thing that you equate playing through the game once to completely finishing it, these two are not one and the same. 

I would understand if the game was 100h and you would lose exta 80 hours to a single missable just because you walked by a barrel and didn't discover it by yourself or something, but it's not what we are discussing here...

Edited March 7, 2022 by Timo425

[xXNanaki24Xx]

21 minutes ago, Sicho said:

What I'm saying is that playing the same game twice is not worth it. It's as simple as that.

 

I understand everything you said up until this point. Missable Trophies are a pain in the butt, especially when there is no challenge tied to it.

I'd rather have an almost impossible trophy like "kill every boss in a row without taking damage" in a special arena or something like that.

 

BUT, there are valid Trophies for multiple playthroughs e.g.: Playing every class to max. lvl or defeat the last boss with every class, speedrun challenges, 1 hit KO challenges, difficulty increases and so on. those kind of trophies wouldnt bother me at all, even if it increases gametime and difficulty. 

 

1 hour ago, Sicho said:

Resident Evil 8 can be platted with several playthroughs in fewer hours than the hours I put in Elden Ring on the first day I started playing ER. Still, I don't have done the plat in Resi8 because why the fuck would I replay the game? I already experienced it, it's done and ticked off. time for the next new shit

 

Resi8 as you mentioned has multiple Playthroughs which ALL differ in game experience.

 

3 minutes ago, Sicho said:

If you are like me and don't like replaying games but there are difficulty trophies but the high difficulties are only available after the first playthrough - bummer. If there are two sides in an in-game war and you have to choose one but the game wants you to play both sides for a trophy instead of sticking to the one that you actually like - bummer. If you want to play a game stealthily but the game also has trophies for playing aggressively - bummer.

 

you are rewarded with Trophies for special accomplishments, not for playing the game, this includes doing things that others wouldnt bother to do.
Casuals play a game once, you played it another time but on harder difficulty -> trophy

There are two sides in an in-game war, you experienced both sides (which enhances the overall experience alone) in seperate playthroughs -> Trophy

If you want to play a game stealthily but also try the game in a more aggressive manner -> Trophy (goes both ways btw.)

 

Trophies are IMO enhancing the game experience if done right, Its not for everyone and shouldnt be. Its okay to miss out on trophies, its okay to play casual, just dont expect trophies to cater to casual, those wouldnt be trophies.

 

PS: I wrote this while working, if this above doesnt make sense, just ignore