Avoiding 30 Minute Plats

[LegendExeter]

6 minutes ago, mega-tallica said:

My perspective is that many AAA modern games require just as little effort and skill than these 'EZPZ' games, the only major difference is the time you have to invest to plat them.

 

To me, that doesn't make them much different from each other. Whether you have to wander around a city for hours to collect hundreds of meaningless spirit collectibles like in Ghostwire: Tokyo or clicking the x button a thousand times for a game like My Name Is Mayo, what's the difference? They're both tedious, easy tasks but one game it takes 10x longer and that's considered a 'quality' plat while My Name Is Mayo is stigmatized just because it doesn't take as long? 

 

With as easy as AAA games are now to plat so they can exploit the trophy hunting community, it's only natural for indie games to follow suit and do the same and exploit it as well. The whole thing has been dumbed down and it's not just these 'EZPZ' games causing it. AAA games are doing the same thing. I just find it odd where more serious trophy hunters draw the line in the sand when it comes to feeding their obsession with trophies. Where the line gets drawn for what is acceptable and what isn't. It's all silly to me. I guess I'm not as obsessed with this stuff as others are and I'm totally fine with that. 

 

There is a pretty massive difference between any other game and EZPZ, and you know it.  Just look at your own profile, is there a difference between the plats you do have, those you haven't even finished, and games like The Rainbow that took you 1 minute, 4 seconds?  The difference here is the time and it's a large difference, that time played also affects enjoyment of a game for better or worse.  The Rainbow cost of $1, $2, I assume something low you completed in 64 seconds, so you literally paid 1 dollar for 1 minute of entertainment.  

 

You have played several of these so I understand you wanting to justify it with your response, however even a board game takes longer than 1 minute to finish.  Those type of games seem like "pay for platinum" rather than an actual game.  As if players that puchase them need a fast moment of gratification rather than an actual experience of any value.  

 

I was more interested in just avoiding extremely short and pointless/mindless games without having to research every title, I find researching the titles here and then looking for them in the PS Store easier; however it appears I will have to be more thorough to avoid such short experience and wasted money.

[mega-tallica]

12 minutes ago, LegendExeter said:

 

There is a pretty massive difference between any other game and EZPZ, and you know it.  Just look at your own profile, is there a difference between the plats you do have, those you haven't even finished, and games like The Rainbow that took you 1 minute, 4 seconds?  The difference here is the time and it's a large difference, that time played also affects enjoyment of a game for better or worse.  The Rainbow cost of $1, $2, I assume something low you completed in 64 seconds, so you literally paid 1 dollar for 1 minute of entertainment.  

 

You have played several of these so I understand you wanting to justify it with your response, however even a board game takes longer than 1 minute to finish.  Those type of games seem like "pay for platinum" rather than an actual game.  As if players that puchase them need a fast moment of gratification rather than an actual experience of any value.  

 

I was more interested in just avoiding extremely short and pointless/mindless games without having to research every title, I find researching the titles here and then looking for them in the PS Store easier; however it appears I will have to be more thorough to avoid such short experience and wasted money.

 

Yes, and I spent $60 for Ghostwire: Tokyo and got 30 hours of boredom out of it. If I wasn't a trophy fiend, I wouldn't have even bothered with finishing that game. That to me is a waste of money so no, there is no difference. Wasting your money on a big AAA game you don't enjoy or wasting your money on a cheap 'EZPZ' game you equally don't like but at least it's short so you don't waste that much time playing it. Considering you've looked at my profile, you can see Ghostwire: Tokyo was the game that set me off buying these 'EZPZ' games and it was Horizon 2 before that. Why artificially inflate my trophy numbers with crappy, long but easy AAA games when I can do the same thing in 1/1000th of the time with a cheap, easy 5 minute game? I would have no problems trading my plat for Ghostwire: Tokyo for 30 easy, 1 hour games instead. A trophy is a trophy, they all hold the same value at the end of the day. 

 

I don't plan on continuing playing these 'EZPZ' games long term, just to get my gold count up mainly since AAA games don't offer many golds and these games do. It's not like these games are expensive. They're $1-$2. You'd have to buy a lot of these games to equal the money you'd spend on one subpar AAA game instead. 

 

There's no justifying here, the games are exactly as you describe, I just find it odd how so many elitist trophy hunters care so much that people do play these games and that they somehow should be banished from existence just because they don't like them. It just comes off as highly arrogant to me. 

[LegendExeter]

24 minutes ago, mega-tallica said:

 

Yes, and I spent $60 for Ghostwire: Tokyo and got 30 hours of boredom out of it. If I wasn't a trophy fiend, I wouldn't have even bothered with finishing that game. That to me is a waste of money so no, there is no difference. Wasting your money on a big AAA game you don't enjoy or wasting your money on a cheap 'EZPZ' game you equally don't like but at least it's short so you don't waste that much time playing it. Considering you've looked at my profile, you can see Ghostwire: Tokyo was the game that set me off buying these 'EZPZ' games and it was Horizon 2 before that. Why artificially inflate my trophy numbers with crappy, long but easy AAA games when I can do the same thing in 1/1000th of the time with a cheap, easy 5 minute game? I would have no problems trading my plat for Ghostwire: Tokyo for 30 easy, 1 hour games instead. A trophy is a trophy, they all hold the same value at the end of the day. 

 

I don't plan on continuing playing these 'EZPZ' games long term, just to get my gold count up mainly since AAA games don't offer many golds and these games do. It's not like these games are expensive. They're $1-$2. You'd have to buy a lot of these games to equal the money you'd spend on one subpar AAA game instead. 

 

There's no justifying here, the games are exactly as you describe, I just find it odd how so many elitist trophy hunters care so much that people do play these games and that they somehow should be banished from existence just because they don't like them. It just comes off as highly arrogant to me. 

 

I think in general we have to ask the question, what are we doing here?  If I'm understanding you right, you got upset that Ghost T was boring after spending $60 on it so you bought some EZ after you platted Ghost to inflate your trophy numbers.  

 

I said this in another thread where there are 2 types the Trophy Hunter who plays games, and the Gamer who collects trophies.  Where it seems you are the former and I'm the latter.  I do say there is a difference in value of trophies, not just based on Plat, Bronze, Gold, etc.  it is what did it take to get that trophy, do you have memories or the experience of it, was it bad, good, boring, great, funny, sad, dramatic, frustrating, etc.  

 

I'm not trying to be elitist and saying that you are less of a human being, I believe we both choose are games of what we would play differently.  I might get bored of a $60 game to, however in the world of PS5 I have 4 PS3's and a PS4 I got from a friend for a good deal.  I don't buy any games at full price anymore, or certainly none at $60, the highest I pay would be $30.  So right away we have differences in the systems we play and as well the cost we would pay at all.  The main difference as I mentioned above is that the Trophy Hunter just wants the trophies regardless of whether the experience was fun or not, while the Gamer cares about the experience first and the trophies second.  

 

I think ultimately if people have no issue with throwing money at a machine to inflate a fictitious score then by all means go ahead and do it.  I would rather play something that at least gives me a few hours of entertainment rather than 5 minutes or less.  Personally I would save the money from EZ and go to the Casino IRL as I might lose the money or I might win some money, but at least I got some entertainment out of it, rather than just raising my leaderboard score.  Especially when no one has any feasible chance of catching up with the people on the very top.  

 

A question for both sides of this discussion is:

 

Would the Gamers who collect trophies play these games and collect if the games were free?

 

Would the Trophy Hunters who play games play these games to beat them if the games were free but had no trophies?

Edited June 3, 2022 by LegendExeter

[Cassylvania]

I usually check out reviews or watch a few minutes of gameplay to judge if a game is worth playing. One of the nice things about these "trash" EZPZs is that they often have similar titles, so if you see something called The Parachuting Banana and then later The Parachuting Squash, you can probably safely assume they're of similar quality. Unfortunately, you still have to wade through them.

 

I recommend not using the search function here. PlatPrices is great. Not only can you see the estimated time to platinum and difficulty from a glance, but you can create a wish list and permanently "hide" games that you no longer want to see (for example, games you've already played or are certain you never want to play). It'd be nice if PSNP implemented such a thing.

 

I don't think completion percentage is a good measurement if you're trying to filter out bad games. Like others have said, you're going to block out some quality titles. Three of my highest completed games -- Old Man's Journey, The Walking Dead: A New Frontier, and The Last Campfire -- were all good. None were 30 minute plats.

 

Maybe if you filtered out any game above ~90% completion? Seems kinda arbitrary, though, and the POWGI games look decent, so... *shrug*

[mega-tallica]

3 hours ago, LegendExeter said:

 

I think in general we have to ask the question, what are we doing here?  If I'm understanding you right, you got upset that Ghost T was boring after spending $60 on it so you bought some EZ after you platted Ghost to inflate your trophy numbers.  

 

I said this in another thread where there are 2 types the Trophy Hunter who plays games, and the Gamer who collects trophies.  Where it seems you are the former and I'm the latter.  I do say there is a difference in value of trophies, not just based on Plat, Bronze, Gold, etc.  it is what did it take to get that trophy, do you have memories or the experience of it, was it bad, good, boring, great, funny, sad, dramatic, frustrating, etc.  

 

I'm not trying to be elitist and saying that you are less of a human being, I believe we both choose are games of what we would play differently.  I might get bored of a $60 game to, however in the world of PS5 I have 4 PS3's and a PS4 I got from a friend for a good deal.  I don't buy any games at full price anymore, or certainly none at $60, the highest I pay would be $30.  So right away we have differences in the systems we play and as well the cost we would pay at all.  The main difference as I mentioned above is that the Trophy Hunter just wants the trophies regardless of whether the experience was fun or not, while the Gamer cares about the experience first and the trophies second.  

 

I think ultimately if people have no issue with throwing money at a machine to inflate a fictitious score then by all means go ahead and do it.  I would rather play something that at least gives me a few hours of entertainment rather than 5 minutes or less.  Personally I would save the money from EZ and go to the Casino IRL as I might lose the money or I might win some money, but at least I got some entertainment out of it, rather than just raising my leaderboard score.  Especially when no one has any feasible chance of catching up with the people on the very top.  

 

A question for both sides of this discussion is:

 

Would the Gamers who collect trophies play these games and collect if the games were free?

 

Would the Trophy Hunters who play games play these games to beat them if the games were free but had no trophies?

 

I flip-flop. For the vast majority of my gaming 'career', I didn't care so much about trophies. I just played games to play them, if I didn't like a game I didn't finish it and whatever trophies I got along the way, I got. It was simple. 

 

Past 6 months or so, I've gotten more serious with it and starting caring more about trophies and 100% completion just out of boredom with my other hobbies at the moment so I've replaced it with trophy hunting. It's fun for short bursts but I could never keep this up long term, it's exhausting. I find myself concerning myself over trophies and 100% too much so now I'm starting to lean the other way again. It's fun until it isn't as with anything you overindulge in I guess.

 

I'm trying to 100% Arkham Knight now and playing through the DLC trophies requires you to play the same challenges over and over with different characters and vehicles to unlock one silver trophy for each character/vehicle skin. Nothing fun about it doing this, it's just a chore at this point and I'm very close to bailing on it and just taking the plat. That's good enough for me. 

 

I'm lucky enough where I make really good money and god knows I blow a lot of my money on stuff I shouldn't and video games are pretty low down on that list of what I blow my money on, trust me. I can see where the obsession comes from where people buy the same game 4-5 times to get the whole stack of platinums for that one game. That's craziness but all the power to those people. If that's what you enjoy doing then go for it. It's not my place or anybody else's to tell what others should be allowed to play and not, what games are 'legit' and which ones aren't. I'm not singling you out particularly, I'm just saying based on my short time on these forums, that there is very much an arrogant elitism when it comes to many trophy hunters and the mindset they carry over a more casual trophy hunter. I don't relate to that mindset and I don't agree with that mindset and it's gotten me into many squabbles with some people here for that very reason. I pity these people more than anything. Trophy hunting should ultimately be fun and based on many of the comments here moaning and complaining about everything trophy related, it doesn't sound like many of the people are having so much fun and are more just feeding an addiction. That's my perspective being a more casual trophy hunter myself. 

[z99f]

Personally, I don't see anything wrong with taking a 'middle' stance on the matter. Now, before people start complaining, what I mean by this is that this topic isn't so cut and dry to the point where a person can simply take a side... I'll elaborate. 

 

People can play whatever games they want. I have absolutely nothing against this whatsoever. If someone wishes to spend their money on Ratalaika games, that is their choice. Similarly, if someone wishes to spend their money on AAA games only, that is also fine. In a 'black and white' world, the debate would end there. However, this IS a trophy hunting site and there have been numerous changes to the trophy system over the years (some for the better, some for the worse). The reason why bringing this up is important is because not everyone likes the way things are headed, and this backlash wash largely due to the onset of 'EZPZ' games that primarily lured people for their trophies.

 

There are two things to note here. First, I think many people that have been around the site long enough will agree that the leaderboards have been tarnished forever with the bombardment of 'EZPZ' games. Yes, I am fully aware that the leaderboards count raw numbers alone. I understand that is their purpose and 'EZPZ' games help people achieve these goals. However, just because no rules have been broken doesn't mean people have to like the current system or how things are done. People have every right not to like something that generates negative results for them. For example, I know many people that enjoyed moving up in the leaderboards before all these 'EZPZ' games came along, but now they couldn't care less because they realize it is a pointless endeavor. Second, I think people are aware that the massive influx of the 'EZPZ' games has not only over saturated the market but also player experiences too. It might be bad practice to lure people with trophies and should not be an industry practice that continues (just my opinion here).

 

Now, to counter my own points from above, I will explain what I think is the flip side. First, 'EZPZ' games are doing exactly what they are intended to do - allow players to enjoy a quick gaming experience and move up the leaderboard simultaneously. In a similar fashion, people complaining about the leaderboards not being 'the same anymore' does not really generate any valid points other than stating a change in the status quo. If people are worrying about the leaderboards so much and what it means, they might need to reconsider its importance in their lives. Second... well this one is simple... just let the devs do what they please and let the consumers decide for themselves. 

 

Like everything, of course, there will be two different camps - those that play for numbers and those that play for experiences (as already mentioned above). Those that play for numbers tend not to care which games they purchase as long as they are quick and easy. Nothing wrong with this. In contrast, those that play for the experience tend to choose their games more carefully (often leaning towards AAA games due to their ongoing reputation). Again, nothing wrong here either, but this may be where the core of the problem lies. Maybe it has more to do with the people more so than the games they are playing. To explain better, both of these two camps have their own 'idea' regarding how trophy hunting should be done (already explained a couple sentences above).  However, I have noticed that the 'elitism' claims are brought up against the more 'veteran' (is this the right word?) trophy hunters. In other words, those that have been trophy hunting for a long time. However, I don't think this elitism is intended to berate or belittle those that enjoy 'EZPZ' games (at least not in most cases). Most of the time, I think these 'old school' trophy hunters are just sharing their dislike of a new questionable trend that has popped up in recent years. I think it comes off as this in many cases because the other side feels as though they are being lectured concerning which games they should play and which trophies they should collect. The way I see it, it's the same thing when 'old timers' reminisce about the golden days and how much everything sucks now lol.

 

At the end of the day, the people that make it about elitism are wrong, and the people that claim every sliver of criticism against 'EZPZ' games are personal attacks against their moral being should take a closer look in the mirror if an online comment about the games they play irritates them that much. 

 

TLDR; play the games you want to play, collect the trophies you want to collect. 

[Caesar Clown]

Souls games have high completion rates because the people who play them set out to finish them. Spider-Man has a high completion. Cross-save PS4/5 games have high completion and completion times in mere seconds.

 

The games you complain about all have trophy lists that look the same. The "Break" games all have the word "Break" in them. The "Jump" ones all have the word "Jump" in them. Basically, you can easily tell which games are cheap and quick if you just look at the list.

[Darling Baphomet]

11 hours ago, mega-tallica said:

My perspective is that many AAA modern games require just as little effort and skill than these 'EZPZ' games, the only major difference is the time you have to invest to plat them.

 

Time is effort.

[Sunny]

20 hours ago, mega-tallica said:

My perspective is that many AAA modern games require just as little effort and skill than these 'EZPZ' games, the only major difference is the time you have to invest to plat them.

Yeah because games like God of War, Sekiro, Metal Gear are on the same level as Jumping Fries or The Cow.

[mega-tallica]

11 hours ago, Darling Baphomet said:

 

Time is effort.

 

With that logic then watching TV requires effort too just because it takes time. Pushing buttons on a controller on such an easy game that it basically plays itself is effort just because it takes time. A lot of things take time, doesn't mean they all require effort. 

 

1 hour ago, Sunnyburrito said:

Yeah because games like God of War, Sekiro, Metal Gear are on the same level as Jumping Fries or The Cow.

 

Nice strawman. 

[Darling Baphomet]

5 hours ago, mega-tallica said:

 

With that logic then watching TV requires effort too just because it takes time. Pushing buttons on a controller on such an easy game that it basically plays itself is effort just because it takes time. A lot of things take time, doesn't mean they all require effort. 

 

 

Nice strawman. 

 

Yes, watching a 100 hour TV show takes a lot more effort than watching a thirty minute special.

 

And no, AAA games do not play themselves, unless you can point me to some AAA idle games.

[mega-tallica]

24 minutes ago, Darling Baphomet said:

 

Yes, watching a 100 hour TV show takes a lot more effort than watching a thirty minute special.

 

And no, AAA games do not play themselves, unless you can point me to some AAA idle games.

 

You're not getting it. Sitting on your ass watching TV is an effortless activity, it doesn't matter how long you sit there and do it, it doesn't change the fact it doesn't require any effort. 

 

The problem here is we have two very different definitions of 'effort'. 

[Darling Baphomet]

Just now, mega-tallica said:

 

You're not getting it. Sitting on your ass watching TV is an effortless activity, it doesn't matter how long you sit there and do it, it doesn't change the fact it doesn't require any effort. 

 

The problem here is we have two very different definitions of 'effort'. 

 

Yeah, the problem here is your definition exists only to support your argument. It has no tangible connection to effort as an actual concept. At the very least the hundred hour TV show would require putting aside one hundred hours of your time, to say nothing of putting effort into actually understanding the show and what you're watching. But that's irrelevant. Lifting a single feather may be a rather effortless activity, but lifting a hundred feathers individually will be a hundred times its effort regardless of how effortless you deem the initial activity.

 

Besides that, your entire premise is built on a straw man. Even the most mindless of AAA games do not "play themselves". Having to progress through an often 20+ hour campaign, track down hundreds of collectibles, etc does, in fact, take significantly more effort than platinuming a game wherein you can get all the trophies in a mere half an hour, without any significant research or preparation.

[D-E-U-S-X]

27 minutes ago, Darling Baphomet said:

 

Yeah, the problem here is your definition exists only to support your argument. It has no tangible connection to effort as an actual concept. At the very least the hundred hour TV show would require putting aside one hundred hours of your time, to say nothing of putting effort into actually understanding the show and what you're watching. But that's irrelevant. Lifting a single feather may be a rather effortless activity, but lifting a hundred feathers individually will be a hundred times its effort regardless of how effortless you deem the initial activity.

 

Besides that, your entire premise is built on a straw man. Even the most mindless of AAA games do not "play themselves". Having to progress through an often 20+ hour campaign, track down hundreds of collectibles, etc does, in fact, take significantly more effort than platinuming a game wherein you can get all the trophies in a mere half an hour, without any significant research or preparation.

 

Effort has been a foreign or misunderstood concept to some trophy hunters for quite some time. It's not surprising, however, since effort has never been part of the leaderboard.

[The Alchemist]

On 6/3/2022 at 3:10 PM, mega-tallica said:

My perspective is that many AAA modern games require just as little effort and skill than these 'EZPZ' games, the only major difference is the time you have to invest to plat them.

 

To me, that doesn't make them much different from each other. Whether you have to wander around a city for hours to collect hundreds of meaningless spirit collectibles like in Ghostwire: Tokyo or clicking the x button a thousand times for a game like My Name Is Mayo, what's the difference? 

 

For a start, I think the main difference between such games is that one took years and many millions to make, was marketed as a serious game to a wider audience, and generally is of a far superior quality whether you personally liked it or not. The other game took a tiny fraction of the time, money and effort to make, and was specifically marketed to trophy hunters, because the developer knew they would not have a hope in hell of selling any copies of their game to the average (non-trophy hunting) gamer. In other words, they were looking to make money rather than a compelling product that would be appreciated by a wider audience. 

 

You also mentioned time to platinum as being the main differentiator, but effort is in fact the main distinction between these types of games. The average AAA game requires your attention. I could be doing 10 things at once and still platinum the majority of EZPZ games, because they're just that simple. I would not be able to do the same with a AAA game. The average AAA game takes far more effort to platinum than any EZPZ game, not just time. Further, I think the reason people consider some AAA games "quality plats" is largely because of said effort invested into earning them. And while I agree that the average AAA has become easier in recent years, they are still leagues above any EZPZ game. Even a 3/10 difficulty AAA game would seem like Crypt of the NecroDancer when compared to those 'Breakthrough' games for example. 

 

In saying this, I have nothing against EZPZ games. And I love the Mayo games too! I've advocated in the past for just letting other people play what they want to and ignore it if it should bother you. As others have pointed out here already, there are good EZPZ games out there too! I personally enjoy most Ratalaika games, with only some that I genuinely disliked. But I generally don't play EZPZ too much anyway. I think the trophy lists and stack abuse are what pisses off most people, and the number chasers who only play these games 24/7, but it is what it is. I just try to concentrate on my own gaming. 

 

[mega-tallica]

2 hours ago, Darling Baphomet said:

Besides that, your entire premise is built on a straw man. Even the most mindless of AAA games do not "play themselves". Having to progress through an often 20+ hour campaign, track down hundreds of collectibles, etc does, in fact, take significantly more effort than platinuming a game wherein you can get all the trophies in a mere half an hour, without any significant research or preparation.

 

It's called figure of speech. I'm not literally saying games play themselves. I'm talking if you were to compare a highly skill dependent game like Mortal Kombat that requires many precisely timed inputs and high attention from the player versus a game like Ghostwire: Tokyo where you just walk around and it only requires you to mash one button to kill all enemies and that's the whole game, I would say these two games require two very different levels of effort with one requiring so little effort that you could say in comparison to the other game, that it requires almost no effort at all. Hence why I used the phrase they 'play themselves'. It's a figure of speech to describe how piss easy and mindless AAA games have become to the point where you can compare them to other mindless games like Jumping Fries more than you can to actual skill dependent games like Mortal Kombat.

 

It's a figure of speech in saying modern games are too easy and I would argue they are delegitimizing trophy hunting as much as these EZPZ games are. If everybody can get the platinums for AAA games and they just have to put the 'time' in to get them, then the trophies become less prestigious and have less value. Just like what you're arguing these EZPZ games are doing. Ratchet & Clank: Rift Apart has like a 70% platinum rate, Ghost of Tsushima is nearly 60%, Horizon 2 will be close to those percentages when all is said and done, barely need to get over 50% completion for that platinum, Spider-Man is around 50%. The time has become the only distinguishing factor and who's willing to put the time in to get these easy platinums. And even then, AAA games are becoming increasingly shorter and shorter while their trophy lists get easier and easier. 

 

"It has no tangible connection to effort as an actual concept"

 

What concept? You're trying to claim effort is some objective concept when it isn't because it justifies your stance. What you may find to require effort, somebody else may not. Time is not the sole distinguishing factor of what is effort and what isn't. Your little feather metaphor; you're just comparing one effortless activity to another effortless activity and going see, that's effort. Simply because one takes more time than the other. The definition of 'effort' in the dictionary is not 'any activity that takes time'. It's something that takes any kind of physical or mental energy which makes it a subjective term and how it's applied to scenarios is subjective. 

Edited June 4, 2022 by mega-tallica

[TimeLordCrow13y]

On 6/4/2022 at 4:33 PM, mega-tallica said:

I would argue they are delegitimizing trophy hunting as much as these EZPZ games are. If everybody can get the platinums for AAA games and they just have to put the 'time' in to get them, then the trophies become less prestigious and have less value.

 

Okay, first you said AAA games were “exploiting” trophy hunters with easy lists, and now you’re saying the easy lists are also delegitimizing trophy hunting. 

 

First of all, I can pretty much guarantee that AAA games aren’t “taking advantage of trophy hunters” with easy lists. Trophy hunters will buy good AAA games regardless of how easy/hard their lists are (look at how well Elden Ring has done for months on this site-from the tiny bit I’ve played, I don’t consider that game easy, and I doubt it has an easy trophy list). 

 

As for trophy hunting being “deligitimized” by easy AAA games....I mean, nothing’s stopping you or anyone else from creating a profile where you only play AAA games you consider “legitimate.” 

 

I’m personally a lot more concerned about games that are created with zero effort deligitmizing the PSN Store than I am about “zero effort trophy lists” deligitimizing trophy hunting. I’d easily play the latest Ratchet & Clank (if I had a PS5) before I’d spend a single second on the latest flood of multiple region stack shovelware.

 

But I’ll also never understand the belief some have that hard/low completion automatically equals good & easy/high completion automatically equals bad. 

Edited June 8, 2022 by TimeLordCrow13y

[AJ_Radio]

On 6/3/2022 at 3:45 PM, z99f said:

The way I see it, it's the same thing when 'old timers' reminisce about the golden days and how much everything sucks now lol.

Look around you. Gas prices are at record highs. College tuition is through the roof. We’re facing an identity crisis, at least where I live. Health care is a major issue. 
 

A number of us, including myself, are facing tough times. Gaming to me is a big reliever, as other entertainment mediums are to others. Trophies are just that cherry on top of the cake.
 

A lot of things do suck, mostly as a result of the system we live under. 

[LegendExeter]

So I was just glancing through psndeals.com and looking at the games on sale and sorted by price, and this game caught my eye.  Then after research I found it, and the other game made by that developer are both 95% plus platinums, and can be quickly beaten with video walktrough.  Can I ask, what are the thoughts on games like these, are they considered shovelware, or even though they are 95% plats with quick walkthroughs are they considered a more "artist inspired" game?

 

Reminiscence In The Night

 

A Sketchbook About Her Son

 

Its interesting to me because on sale, the one went from $4.99 to $3.99, so not groundbreaking yet its like the developer doesn't want to just give it away as they put some effort into the games.

 

Thoughts??

 

 

[TheBlaskar]

I mean yeah I avoid 30-minute plats... and then do a hard game or series and say "screw it I earned this" and finish like a dozen plus easy plats. As long as you've completed some impressive games or earned some impressive trophies, who cares? If you only do easy games? I mean I'll have less respect for your trophy collection but honestly good for you for doing what makes you happy. A good balance, I'd say, is for the best.

 

Stacks of easy games, though? Support companies like the ones who make the "Break" "Run" "Time" etc bs spam plats? that's a line I don't cross

[depresso-cat]

I with you on this (didn't read the thread). I'm a lover, not a hunter, but I like to finish;) so quick platinums for the sake of quick platinum does nothing for me. However, after playing game like Metal Gear Solid V for close to 400 hours, I do look for good quick games before I go on another multi-hundred hour completion. 

The problem with your approach is that you miss some good games (sometimes game can be platinumed in 30 mins, but just because people skip all the content, for example Telling Lies), or perhaps game doesn't really deserve platimun because of their length, but are still pretty damn good games, like Undertale, or Minit, but these games are still few hour games even for hunter crowd.

So yea, I only played one 30-min plat Telling Lies, but it took me 16 hour to platinum because I actually played the game. 

Wall of text and no point so far.. What I trying to say, is that you can't auto-dismiss a game because it can be done in 30 mins, there are some good games in the heap of rubbish

Edited September 17, 2022 by depresso-cat
Gramma

[Xillynoc]

In general, when looking at games I'm interested in on the store, I'll look up their trophy lists on here before purchase. If they've got a <60% plat rate and nothing marked as unattainable bc of servers or glitches, I'll buy; if the plat rate is either just below 100% or just above 0% and/or there are unattainable trophies, I'll move on. Simple as.

[tampines11]

Just avoid any games with 9 gold, 5 silver and 6 bronze.

[Pots3k]

It may sound obvious, but my goto method for proving the legitimacy of a game is to type in google. Does it have a sidebar with steam/google reviews? Good or bad, if it has reviews, it's an actual game.

[AllieWalton66]

Not my fault it's the only way to keep up nowadays.

 

I still do real games in between so I'm a complete lost cause I guess.