Earning platinum before release date

[olliebear66t]

If I ever make a game, you bet your bollocks I'm going to be the first one to platinum it. 

 

But anyway yeah this is such a non-issue. Whoever gets access to the game first can get on the leaderboards first. The average dev/publisher don't care about trophies that much. If you want to get it first so much then you have to go out of your way and get yourself early access like a reviewer copy or however powpyx does it. That's part of the game. You could also go for the fastest achievers list if you wanted. Trying to "fix" this would only cause more problems 

[You]

16 minutes ago, DaivRules said:

Many people have jobs or family responsibilities that can’t be put on hold just to play games, is it fair if they want to be first? Some people don’t have the money to buy the game but still want to be first, is it fair to them? Some people have pretty slow internet access so they may not get to access the game as quickly as someone with fast access, is that fair to them?

 

lol. Well yes, that's completely fair actually. If you don't the time, you deserve to lose. It fair if they want to be first, they just have to put in the effort and be there like everyone else.

 

Is it fair I don't have an olympic gold medal for 100m sprint? Oh no, I've got a full time job and I'm mid 40s. Why can't I just buy a gold medal? Why can't the Olympic athletes wait for me to catch up?

 

Toxia took time off work and didn't sleep, to be first to get platinum on Final Fantasy VII. Granted it's something I'd do, it's kinda reckless, but that guy made the sacrifice, he put in the effort, is he had a family or other responsibilities then yeah, someone else would have beaten him. He seems to be proud of it. Achievements in some areas of life do require sacrifice everything else.

 

I know your argument makes sense and in the context of a better subject it would be appropriate. But here, fairness is a bit subjective because since to get first achiever you do have to be willing to sacrifice, and drop everything to be there. Which of course in this case, it really is unfair when you line up for the race, but someone won the gold medal yesterday.

 

I have a family and responsibilities and I could not compete of course. The thing is, I know my limits, I wouldn't be good enough even if I did have all the time in the world. But I'm not the one bitter about this, I'm just pointing out how it's a bit odd that this is allowed.

 

Also, it's nice to hear from testers of games. I think it's fine you're doing that, but still, as a tester, there's no particular reason why you need to be testing the game on your home personal PSN accounts, don't Sony or the devs have proper tester accounts you can be testing stuff on?

Edited April 18, 2023 by enaysoft

[fbdbh]

Just now, enaysoft said:

Also, it's nice to hear from testers of games. I think it's fine you're doing that, but still, as a tester, there's no particular reason why you need to be testing the game on your home personal PSN accounts, don't Sony or the devs have proper tester accounts you can be testing stuff on?

 

There is a particular reason, the particular reason being: I want those trophies, and done. Review copies don't come with accounts.

 

But the point is: IT DOESN'T MATTER. What the hell do you even win in this stupid non-competition? Do you think people in a few decades, standing around your grave will sing the hymns of your masterful feats of being the first in Ding Dong Buster ZX Remastered 2? Get real.

[ARIXANDRE]

Playing games for trophies is a treat when you don't focus on any type of leaderboard. 

 

Have your experience with the games you love.

 

Or move to New Zealand and become Skill Up to get copies before the whole world ??‍♂️?

[Deadly_Ha_Ha]

Don't worry about it dude, with cheats these lists are kind of bullshit anyway

[lankylad1606]

I feel like there are two issues here and people are combining unecessarily. The leaderboards on this website are not run by Sony or by any devs of games, if these people wish to provide testing or review copies that's their choice. However, when those reviewers / testers then use their review account to create a PSNP profile and upload their plat to this site and it is listed in the games 1st achievers list, this is a problem that the site should be looking to resolve. Otherwise, why not just delete the feature if it is meaningless.

 

I feel like those that are responding to just not care about who got first are backing this point up. If the system exists to show first achievers it should be meaningful and if people are saying that it is what it is and don't use it then it isn't a system that should be on this website.

 

Quick edit for suggestion

 

It seems to me one solution could be to not allow any timestamped trophy that has a time and date before release to appear on these list. Yes this would of course mean worldwide launches still have issues but as it's not difficult to open regional accounts anyone serious on having a race could gain a copy.

Edited April 18, 2023 by lankylad1606
added suggestion

[DaivRules]

22 minutes ago, enaysoft said:

It fair if they want to be first, they just have to put in the effort and be there like everyone else.

Well then whoever wants to be first should put in the effort to get review copies like everyone else. 
 

[fbdbh]

Just now, lankylad1606 said:

I feel like there are two issues here and people are combining unecessarily. The leaderboards on this website are not run by Sony or by any devs of games, if these people wish to provide testing or review copies that's their choice. However, when those reviewers / testers then use their review account to create a PSNP profile and upload their plat to this site and it is listed in the games 1st achievers list, this is a problem that the site should be looking to resolve. Otherwise, why not just delete the feature if it is meaningless.

 

I feel like those that are responding to just not care about who got first are backing this point up. If the system exists to show first achievers it should be meaningful and if people are saying that it is what it is and don't use it then it isn't a system that should be on this website.

 

Now this I can agree with. This feature shouldn't exist, because it makes zero sense.

[DaivRules]

1 minute ago, fbdbh said:

 

Now this I can agree with. This feature shouldn't exist, because it makes zero sense.

It does make sense, it shows what it’s called. The First Achiever. People just don’t like that it doesn’t show what they want it to mean. 
 

[fbdbh]

Just now, DaivRules said:

It does make sense, it shows what it’s called. The First Achiever. People just don’t like that it doesn’t show what they want it to mean. 
 

 

Okay, let me rephrase: it's useless information. Inapplicable in any competitive sense. The goalpost would move every time you could make a case for "fair rules".

[You]

3 minutes ago, DaivRules said:

Well then whoever wants to be first should put in the effort to get review copies like everyone else. 
 

 

lol. In other words, if you can beat them, join them?
 

Endorsing unfair means to get ahead if the way to go!

We heard it officially from the horse's mouth! Well, from the dog's mouth I guess in this case.

 

[fbdbh]

Just now, enaysoft said:

 

lol. In other words, if you can beat them, join them?
 

Endorsing unfair means to get ahead if the way to go!

We heard it officially from the horse's mouth! Well, from the dog's mouth I guess in this case.

 

 

Again: it is not unfair. It is the reality whether you like it or not. There was nothing that defined fair.

 

Fair would be starting with a timer on a set date where everybody could prepare. Like, in an organized competition. This? This was NEVER supposed to be fair.

[You]

1 minute ago, fbdbh said:

Again: it is not unfair.

 

2 minutes ago, fbdbh said:

This? This was NEVER supposed to be fair.

 

Erm, So is it Fair or Unfair then? You seem at odds with yourself.

[DaivRules]

2 minutes ago, enaysoft said:

 

lol. In other words, if you can beat them, join them?
 

Endorsing unfair means to get ahead if the way to go!

We heard it officially from the horse's mouth! Well, from the dog's mouth I guess in this case.

 

You have already acknowledged there is no framework for implementing your perception of fairness, so continuing to perpetuate Im somehow the problem doesn’t solve that you’ve put forward no clear definition or solution to the problem you have. 
 

[You]

Just now, DaivRules said:

You have already acknowledged there is no framework for implementing your perception of fairness, so continuing to perpetuate Im somehow the problem doesn’t solve that you’ve put forward no clear definition or solution to the problem you have. 
 

 

The slightly more fair route which someone literally suggested a moment ago was to limit trophies before the official release date.

That seems like a good idea, well a decent idea that we have now, and a much better idea than "Suck it, you should "work hard" by requesting review copies as well" type of mentality.

 

lankylad1606 took point out something interesting though which reviewers / journalists going out their way to get early copies and then come IMMEDIATELY COME TO THIS SITE upload their profiles to be the first achiever of the plat ahead of the general population, that does seem a bit lame. Like why is a game tester even doing that, flaunting their advantage to people who care about that sort of thing.

 

I guess though if they're anything like that guy playing the new Doom or Cuphead. They probably do need a headstart. lol

[DrBloodmoney]

Personally, I don't give a toss about the "First" Leaderboards...

...and to be honest, I think the chasing of that "first place" is just another in a long line of negative outcomes that trophies can have on the enjoyment of games.

 

 

 

...however, I do like playing Devil's advocate ?

 

 

 

As such...

...I think those arguing against review copies and early copies being included in those "first" boards are making a poor one.

 

 

IMO, the argument those folks should be making is this:

 

 

The site does not allow trophies earned after server closure dates, if they were earned on "unapproved" custom servers.

 

There are few reasons this prohibition is justified - the servers not being open source, potentially being open to cheating/ hacking etc, or the use of them requiring CFW...

 

...but - crucially - one of those arguments is: 

 

those servers may gate access, and not be open to everyone.

 

 

That mean, according to the site, universal access, and an "even playing field" is considered a prerequisite to inclusion on the leaderboards for trophies earned after the "generally accepted" period of eligibility....

 

....so, ipso facto, the lack of universal access to review copies / early street date copies / codes/ etc. could be argued to justify preclusion of those trophies earned before the "generally accepted" period of eligibility.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[turniplord]

1 hour ago, CoregBlue said:

I agree, Nobody Cares and being the First or among the First is no achievement whatsoever imo. Its Something everyone can do Skill wise but Most people enjoy a Game the First time. Just means you have that much time and Rush through the Game. 

 

Some get the Games earlier, some have all the time in the world to Play Games and some dont for various reasons. Always been meaningless to be First from the very start.

 

Anyway on topic i wanted to Ask If the price for the individual Versions are Up in the US Store? Cant See them in the EU Store right now and am thinking about buying the collectors depending on how much Difference there is.

They're not appearing on PSN early (as per SE website). But, if they're the same as the Switch then it's £64.99 for the collection or: FF1 and 2 are £9.50 each and 3-6 are £14.99 each - a saving of £13.97 if you grab the bundle

[Thrillhelm]

You don't have to be a reviewer to be first on the leaderboard long before others.

I have bought the physical release of Tower of Guns and the EU version of Umehara Kawase Bazooka (or so) in the same store (large German brand), someone put them on the shelf weeks before release. Got 100% in Tower of Guns two weeks and Bazooka platinum a whole month before everyone else. 

 

[Boni_Neto]

I never memorized any first achiever's name. I think it would only be useful to yourself, I couldn't care less if you're first or 356th.

[turniplord]

9 minutes ago, enaysoft said:

 

The slightly more fair route which someone literally suggested a moment ago was to limit trophies before the official release date.

That seems like a good idea, well a decent idea that we have now, and a much better idea than "Suck it, you should "work hard" by requesting review copies as well" type of mentality.

 

lankylad1606 took point out something interesting though which reviewers / journalists going out their way to get early copies and then come IMMEDIATELY COME TO THIS SITE upload their profiles to be the first achiever of the plat ahead of the general population, that does seem a bit lame. Like why is a game tester even doing that, flaunting their advantage to people who care about that sort of thing.

 

I guess though if they're anything like that guy playing the new Doom or Cuphead. They probably do need a headstart. lol

What's the worst thing for people that love to get trophies - getting a game day-one then realising there are issues unlocking some trophies and having to wait for a fix. You may have all but one then you're not around when the patch drops and a bunch of people get it before you and complete the list despite you technically being the first to gain all the others...

Basically, you have no idea how many publishers and developers I've talked to pre-launch regarding trophies not unlocking correctly and glitches which stopped certain trophies working. This info is then used to push out updates just before launch so consumers don't have the same issues when they get it on launch day. Strip away the ability to get trophies (which Sony won't do as it'll require an identical second version on PSN, thus submitted for approval twice, paid for twice, and listed on PSN twice (even though one will be hidden from view), then you're effectively taking away the final piece of unpaid QA which a lot of studios rely on due to them not playing the game on a retail unit in the office.


Also, we don't 'immediately come to this site and upload our profiles' - I have a paid account on here, that auto-syncs my account, so I don't have to come here to update it, it just happens. For people like PowerPYX and their team, even if they don't have Premium, someone coming on here and searching for that person's account will trigger an update and pull through the trophy details.

Even though we grab trophies pre-launch, the majority of us don't care, we're either playing the game inside out, seeing everything the dev want's us to so we can talk about it in the review, or we've played the game, enjoyed it, so wanted to carry on playing - as we're also gamers... believe it or not. 

Edited April 18, 2023 by turniplord

[You]

QA should be a paid job. Whether you like the game or not.

[fbdbh]

16 minutes ago, enaysoft said:

 

 

Erm, So is it Fair or Unfair then? You seem at odds with yourself.

 

• "First Achiever" as a meaningful metric for competition - unfair, never supposed to be fair
• Having access to games before release date because it is somebody's job - more than fair

But "fairness" is meaningless, when "First Achiever" is meaningless, because not everybody starts at the same time, but it would be EXTREMELY UNFAIR to start imposing all kinds of restrictions on somebody's profile, even as far as taking away their platinum because you and a handful of other gamers perceive "First Achiever" as some sort of actual, meaningful thing. Because it's NOT, and was never supposed to be. And I have no idea why it is even a thing here.

[turniplord]

Just now, enaysoft said:

QA should be a paid job. Whether you like the game or not.

And it is, QA (testing the game for bugs and reporting them to the development team directly) isn't the same as reviewing a game and noticing things like trophies that aren't unlocking on a retail unit.

The QA team aren't working in a live environment - if they were, you'd see the QA team unlocking trophies months in advance. Look at Goldeneye on Xbox - over there some devs do play pre-launch on retail units and they grabbed trophies around 5 months before the game was even announced.

It's not possible to spot every issue on a dev kit, things that work there may not work when you're on a retail unit and connected to PSN.

This is such a non-issue

[El Duderino]

Some people's lives must be incredibly empty if all they want is to be the first to get a trophy. Jesus fuck, you'll never be! Look at this, an achievement from GoldenEye. The devs got it way over a year before the game launched (27 January 2023).



But the illusion of the being FIRST seems to be real for some folks.

[lankylad1606]

1. So again as the argument keeps happening, this site is not an official part of the sony network and it is not automatically part of the QA / review process. The early release of games to a select group for these things is really important including letting them have the ability to check trophy popping prior to launch and this is done on the PS network but has nothing to do with this discussion. This issue is when this information is then uploaded to this website which is a choice and not required for them to do their job.

 

The website already makes use of timestamps to populate the first achievers table and does so taking into account timezones. It would not be difficult to include an exception into the first achievers table to not include dates and times before the official release. Hell you could probably ask chat GPT to write the addition for you. To highlight i am talking about this table exclusively, it would not impact peoples ability to have the early plat on their main profile just in their ability to use the progress for 1st achiever.

 

2. There are also a lot of statements that are of the line that they don't care about 1st achievers and so someone else shouldn't either. This is a dangerous line of logic in all walks of life and i would urge people to avoide it in discussions where possible.

 

An example of the idea here is WoW or to a lesser extent FFXIV who have world first races, these would be meaningless if one guild got the patch a month early and no one would watch. However, despite only a few actually caring enough to go for it, hundreds of thousands if not millions of people routinely tune in to watch their progress in this race. Wouldn't it be cool if a tool that already exists on this website could be adjusted to allow any group intrested in trying or just following progress to do so, even if it is a fraction of the popularity as the big examples.

Edited April 18, 2023 by lankylad1606
typos