Dumbest Platinum

[IntroPhenom]

On 4/15/2017 at 0:33 PM, WesMJ12 said:

What is the dumbest platinum trophy you have earned?

mine would defiantly be My Name Is Mayo LOL

 

 

 

There are no dumb platinums.   Trophy hunters want platinums, and game developers sell more copies of their game if it has a platinum, so everyone wins.  We get more trophies, and they get more money.  Smart on both accounts, really.

 

 

Edited July 6, 2017 by IntroPhenom

[SINISTER-SINS_]

5 minutes ago, IntroPhenom said:

 

There are no dumb platinums.   Trophy hunters want platinums, and game developers sell more copies of their game if it has a platinum, so everyone wins.  We get more trophies, and they get more money.  Smart on both accounts, really.

 

 

 

 

Technical, I like it.

[yowzagabowza]

Fuckin Catlateral Damage. What a waste of time. Game sucks and I don't know what the hell I was thinking playing it. At least it was cheap. 

[SirEricLPer]

I actually oppose super easy games just to get a platinum. But if I had to choose it would be Colour Guardians ?

[Kittens Are Awesome]

Some of you take trophy hunting too damn seriously. "There are no dumb platinums." I'd definitely disagree. I've seen some downright stoopid platinums out there.

 

Mine would be Super Street Fighter 4. C 2 Shining C trophy makes that whole plat dumb. Dumb as a rock.

[Undead Wolf]

51 minutes ago, IntroPhenom said:

There are no dumb platinums.   Trophy hunters want platinums, and game developers sell more copies of their game if it has a platinum, so everyone wins.  We get more trophies, and they get more money.  Smart on both accounts, really.

 

Except what you're really doing is encouraging these so-called developers to pump out more of these shitty games that took maybe a few days to make. You're being exploited. Expect to see more and more of these things flood the store, making it harder to find the games people actually put effort into making. But suuuure, keep acting like you're doing some noble deed. 

[thegirlruka]

1 minute ago, Undead Wolf said:

 

Except what you're really doing is encouraging these so-called developers to pump out more of these shitty games that took maybe a few days to make. You're being exploited. Expect to see more and more of these things flood the store, making it harder to find the games people actually put effort into making. But suuuure, keep acting like you're doing some noble deed. 

It's no different from buying a candy bar, really. You pay $1 and get a short release of dopamine from the brain upon finishing your product. There's new companies making new candy bars all the time, but that doesn't take away from the well balanced meals that are still available to eat.

 

OT: My dumbest platinum is Rocket League. I played it for the easy platinum and now it's getting a ton of DLC trophies. I wish I hadn't started it.

[IntroPhenom]

9 minutes ago, Undead Wolf said:

 

Except what you're really doing is encouraging these so-called developers to pump out more of these shitty games that took maybe a few days to make. You're being exploited. Expect to see more and more of these things flood the store, making it harder to find the games people actually put effort into making. But suuuure, keep acting like you're doing some noble deed. 

 

I wasn't acting noble, just offering a side of the discussion not yet mentioned.  I wasn't specifically or flagrantly denouncing anything, nor was I calling out anything as superior.  (I appreciate both the nyah-nyah emoji and the 'suuuure', for the record.)

 

To your point, assuming I would purchase any game with a platinum regardless of quality isn't illogical, based off of the context, but that's not actually true.  I only buy games I think I'll enjoy, though I do often take a chance on .99 cent games for fun, which is how I discovered Mayo in the first place.

 

Your concern about a shortage of quality games resulting from a market flood of 'shitty' ones isn't realistic.  AAA titles are in no short supply, as they're the ones selling millions of copies.  The recent pull of that 1000 ratings game, or whatever it was called, is evidence of Sony having limits to what they're willing to allow.

 

Fear not!  We're poised to have a nice balance of quick and easy AND lengthy and fulfilling games for ages to come!

 

 

[Undead Wolf]

13 minutes ago, kuuhaku said:

It's no different from buying a candy bar, really. You pay $1 and get a short release of dopamine from the brain upon finishing your product. There's new companies making new candy bars all the time, but that doesn't take away from the well balanced meals that are still available to eat.

 

Nice analogy, but I'd make a few changes to it.  First of all, the company that makes these candy bars use child slave labour, so by supporting them, you're contributing towards their continued exploitation. Secondly, the candy bar tastes like shit (literally), but it doesn't take long to finish, so many think the dopamine release you get by eating it all makes it a worthwhile purchase. I think that makes things a little more accurate. 

 

2 minutes ago, IntroPhenom said:

Your concern about a shortage of quality games resulting from a market flood of 'shitty' ones isn't realistic.  AAA titles are in no short supply, as they're the ones selling millions of copies.  The recent pull of that 1000 ratings game, or whatever it was called, is evidence of Sony having limits to what they're willing to allow.

 

I didn't say there wouldn't be as many quality titles, but I am saying it would be harder to find them. AAA games are always going to be fine in terms of people discovering them, but many indie game developers rely on the attention its game receives by being on the front page of an online store or by word of mouth. If the store is getting flooded with these shitty games, their time in the spotlight is going to be greatly reduced. I think it's a shame to see something like that 1000 Top Rated game sell so many copies when there is likely some indie game that one guy who poured his heart and soul into making a game receives next to no attention.

 

Sony only had a problem with the description literally advertising the game as an easy platinum. The game will return, easy platinum and all, it will just have a different title and description now. So don't worry, Sony still have next to no standards when it comes to this stuff. 

[Jun_Kazama316]

I don't have any dumb platinum's, but i do have a shitty platinum and it's called - Magus.

[IntroPhenom]

32 minutes ago, Undead Wolf said:

 

Nice analogy, but I'd make a few changes to it.  First of all, the company that makes these candy bars use child slave labour, so by supporting them, you're contributing towards their continued exploitation. Secondly, the candy bar tastes like shit (literally), but it doesn't take long to finish, so many think the dopamine release you get by eating it all makes it a worthwhile purchase. I think that makes things a little more accurate. 

 

 

I didn't say there wouldn't be as many quality titles, but I am saying it would be harder to find them. AAA games are always going to be fine in terms of people discovering them, but many indie game developers rely on the attention its game receives by being on the front page of an online store or by word of mouth. If the store is getting flooded with these shitty games, their time in the spotlight is going to be greatly reduced. I think it's a shame to see something like that 1000 Top Rated game sell so many copies when there is likely some indie game that one guy who poured his heart and soul into making a game receives next to no attention.

 

Sony only had a problem with the description literally advertising the game as an easy platinum. The game will return, easy platinum and all, it will just have a different title and description now. So don't worry, Sony still have next to no standards when it comes to this stuff. 

 

Child labor??  You're just being facetious now.  to you.

 

In all fairness, your phrase 'Expect to see more and more of these things flood the store, making it harder to find the games people actually put effort into making.' does express an opinion of a reduction in the number of quality titles.  Quality titles = people putting effort into making them.  I do get your point, though.

 

Honestly, with the ubiquity of content and coverage in this day and age, the idea of a great game getting no recognition seems almost impossible.  Maybe if quick and easy plats (hereto known as 'queapl', a term I just coined to describe these games, which is pronounced quee-pull, and is an amalgamation of quick, easy, and platinum) do flood the market, more substantive games will receive less attention. But should that day come, our duty as gamers will be to shine light on them, to elevate them, and I have limitless confidence we will be successful.

 

[starcrunch061]

19 hours ago, Undead Wolf said:

 

Except what you're really doing is encouraging these so-called developers to pump out more of these shitty games that took maybe a few days to make. You're being exploited. Expect to see more and more of these things flood the store, making it harder to find the games people actually put effort into making. But suuuure, keep acting like you're doing some noble deed. 

 

There's something to this, but I don't think it can be blamed exclusively on easy plats. Plenty of broken games, recycled games, and downright criminal games already flood the market. The only way to stop that is to have a good editor in place, or else to let people get refunds on games. Sony has been so-so in the first case, and downright atrocious in the second.

 

18 hours ago, IntroPhenom said:

Honestly, with the ubiquity of content and coverage in this day and age, the idea of a great game getting no recognition seems almost impossible.  

 

No offense, but that's completely false. Studies have shown that a massive amount of content moves consumers towards trusted brands, rather than great content. Disney has taken this idea and run with it, to great success.

 

In both film and, especially, music, indie content has been swallowed by a tide of popular, big brand stuff. Maybe it's the case that indie music just sucks, while pop music is truly great, but the general consensus is that, because there is just so much junk to sift through, people won't bother. 

 

18 hours ago, IntroPhenom said:

 Quality titles = people putting effort into making them

 

This was meant to be ironical, no?

 

Anyway, this is my last post on these sidebars,as it's gotten far off course of the original purpose of the thread, and frankly, it's stale. I have no stake in the opinions of others regarding plats and the like. However, there do seem to be many false assumptions here.

Edited July 7, 2017 by starcrunch061

[IntroPhenom]

21 minutes ago, starcrunch061 said:

 

There's something to this, but I don't think it can be blamed exclusively on easy plats. Plenty of broken games, recycled games, and downright criminal games already flood the market. The only way to stop that is to have a good editor in place, or else to let people get refunds on games. Sony has been so-so in the first case, and downright atrocious in the second.

 

 

No offense, but that's completely false. Studies have shown that a massive amount of content moves consumers towards trusted brands, rather than great content. Disney has taken this idea and run with it, to great success.

 

In both film and, especially, music, indie content has been swallowed by a tide of popular, big brand stuff. Maybe it's the case that indie music just sucks, while pop music is truly great, but the general consensus is that, because there is just so much junk to sift through, people won't bother. 

 

 

This was meant to be ironical, no?

 

Anyway, this is my last post on these sidebars,as it's gotten far off course of the original purpose of the thread, and frankly, it's stale. I have no stake in the opinions of others regarding plats and the like. However, there do seem to be many false assumptions here.

 

Dude, you can't raise interesting points and then ask to end the conversation.

 

Anyway, two quick things: What about my quoted statement made you perceive it to be ironical?  

 

Two, you don't mean to imply that trusted brands aren't ever great content, correct?  Can you think of a great game recently that received no coverage? I tried, but came up short.  It's proven sites like Google direct consumers in a biased way, but my thought was niche websites like this one will always provide coverage for great games.

[JAM-026]

20 hours ago, yowzagabowza said:

Fuckin Catlateral Damage. What a waste of time. Game sucks and I don't know what the hell I was thinking playing it. At least it was cheap. 

I actually enjoyed playing that game. I thought it was funny making such a huge mess!

[starcrunch061]

Just now, IntroPhenom said:

 

Dude, you can't raise interesting points and then ask to end the conversation.

 

Anyway, two quick things: What about my quoted statement made you perceive it to be ironical?  

 

Two, you don't mean to imply that trusted brands aren't ever great content, correct?  Can you think of a great game recently that received no coverage? I tried, but came up short.  It's proven sites like Google direct consumers in a biased way, but my thought was niche websites like this one will always provide coverage for great games.

 

I thought giving you the last word would be, uh, the polite thing to do? 

Anyway, since you asked, I'll post one last time, and give you the final rebuttal:

 

1. Effort doesn't imply quality. It's harsh to tell developers who worked hard that their game sucked, but it's often true (particularly for indies). I'm a cold, rational consumer, so at the end of the day, I paint try-hard indies with the same brush as, say, Lightning Games Studios. 
2. Not at all. Trusted brands deliver solid content (in fact, I got on the wrong side of another poster recently by saying that trusted brands delivered far more solid content than indies). As far as "great" games that receive no coverage, this is tougher to measure, since "greatness" is in the eyes of the beholder. So, instead, I'll consider a couple of recent games that I played that just didn't receive coverage, for whatever reasons.

• Gryphon Knight Epic: This was an indie with a successful Kickstarter. It currently has 5 metacritic reviews that I can find, spread across multiple platforms. Even Wheels of Aurelia (a low-tech indie played by few) has more reviews than this. Further, those reviews make little sense. Consider, e.g., the following review from Brash Games. The writer praises the game, only to give it a 7 out of 10. Why 7? Who knows? It's completely random. Those words could apparently have been used to give anywhere from a 1-10; The review is so vague that it's unclear exactly what the guy played. I don't mind that a person likes or dislikes a game, but these reviews look to be from people who didn't even play the game.
• I imagine that most people would consider Axiom Verge a success, regardless of their particular opinion toward the game. A decent number of people purchased it. However, was it because of the coverage it received? Well, according to Metacritic for the Wii U version, there are a grand total of 8 reviews (once again, Wheels of Aurelia lists more). 

This isn't a new phenomenon. I remember when Star Ocean: The Last Hope was to be released for the PS3. The published "review" in Game Informer gave it (drum roll) a 7. The review itself was a paragraph long, and the main gist was "There's no reason to spend your money on this game with Final Fantasy XIII right around the corner." No info on the game itself, not even a summary of why the game should be set aside for an unreleased competitive RPG. (Author's note: that was about the time that I started to believe the internet chatter about paid reviews. I mean, what was the point of using a review for one game to advertise the release of another, if not compensation?). But with the absolute deluge of indie games each month, I just don't think it's possible for the few reviewers out there to get to all of them. 

 

So, to summarize this hopelessly long drivel post of mine, I agree in principle with Undead Wolf. I think that the massive deluge of games is ultimately going to hurt the market. However, I disagree with his view that the massive deluge of games will be due to cheap plats. Both are of course speculation on my part, but I think the real problem is a developer like Lightning Games Studio, who recycles (and outright steals) content from other games, loads it up on the store, and crowds out what might be a good title that was released 3 weeks prior. Since Sony's main filter for new releases is the date of release, it's easy to push older titles out of the collective conscious of the gamer base. And honestly, while I rail at Sony for this, there's little they can do (think of Spotify, or Youtube, who can't possibly filter all of the stuff they receive).

 

in the end, I think this will destroy our current indie revolution, exactly as it has for music and movies. This is one of the great problems with digital delivery. With a physical store, you have finite space, which means that games which take that shelf space had to demonstrate some quality beyond being the newest release. Further, since stores must purchase their stock beforehand (as opposed merely to renting space to publishers), they can't afford to take on stock of lousy games (though, even there, the system is failing, as stores continue to get burnt by what they perceive as trusted brands like SquareEnix, only to have their content rot on the shelves). With the digital storefront, there is no loss to the store owner (Sony) for failing products. Further, even if they lose what would be a good seller, there's always so much more content the next month (coupled with the hype of fanboys, the internet, and gamer "expos" like E3).

 

But anyway, blah blah blah? If any post deserves the tl;dr tag, it's this one. So, with that, I'm out.

[IntroPhenom]

14 minutes ago, starcrunch061 said:

 

I thought giving you the last word would be, uh, the polite thing to do? 

Anyway, since you asked, I'll post one last time, and give you the final rebuttal:

 

1. Effort doesn't imply quality. It's harsh to tell developers who worked hard that their game sucked, but it's often true (particularly for indies). I'm a cold, rational consumer, so at the end of the day, I paint try-hard indies with the same brush as, say, Lightning Games Studios. 
2. Not at all. Trusted brands deliver solid content (in fact, I got on the wrong side of another poster recently by saying that trusted brands delivered far more solid content than indies). As far as "great" games that receive no coverage, this is tougher to measure, since "greatness" is in the eyes of the beholder. So, instead, I'll consider a couple of recent games that I played that just didn't receive coverage, for whatever reasons.

• Gryphon Knight Epic: This was an indie with a successful Kickstarter. It currently has 5 metacritic reviews that I can find, spread across multiple platforms. Even Wheels of Aurelia (a low-tech indie played by few) has more reviews than this. Further, those reviews make little sense. Consider, e.g., the following review from Brash Games. The writer praises the game, only to give it a 7 out of 10. Why 7? Who knows? It's completely random. Those words could apparently have been used to give anywhere from a 1-10; The review is so vague that it's unclear exactly what the guy played. I don't mind that a person likes or dislikes a game, but these reviews look to be from people who didn't even play the game.
• I imagine that most people would consider Axiom Verge a success, regardless of their particular opinion toward the game. A decent number of people purchased it. However, was it because of the coverage it received? Well, according to Metacritic for the Wii U version, there are a grand total of 8 reviews (once again, Wheels of Aurelia lists more). 

This isn't a new phenomenon. I remember when Star Ocean: The Last Hope was to be released for the PS3. The published "review" in Game Informer gave it (drum roll) a 7. The review itself was a paragraph long, and the main gist was "There's no reason to spend your money on this game with Final Fantasy XIII right around the corner." No info on the game itself, not even a summary of why the game should be set aside for an unreleased competitive RPG. (Author's note: that was about the time that I started to believe the internet chatter about paid reviews. I mean, what was the point of using a review for one game to advertise the release of another, if not compensation?). But with the absolute deluge of indie games each month, I just don't think it's possible for the few reviewers out there to get to all of them. 

 

So, to summarize this hopelessly long drivel post of mine, I agree in principle with Undead Wolf. I think that the massive deluge of games is ultimately going to hurt the market. However, I disagree with his view that the massive deluge of games will be due to cheap plats. Both are of course speculation on my part, but I think the real problem is a developer like Lightning Games Studio, who recycles (and outright steals) content from other games, loads it up on the store, and crowds out what might be a good title that was released 3 weeks prior. Since Sony's main filter for new releases is the date of release, it's easy to push older titles out of the collective conscious of the gamer base. And honestly, while I rail at Sony for this, there's little they can do (think of Spotify, or Youtube, who can't possibly filter all of the stuff they receive).

 

in the end, I think this will destroy our current indie revolution, exactly as it has for music and movies. This is one of the great problems with digital delivery. With a physical store, you have finite space, which means that games which take that shelf space had to demonstrate some quality beyond being the newest release. Further, since stores must purchase their stock beforehand (as opposed merely to renting space to publishers), they can't afford to take on stock of lousy games (though, even there, the system is failing, as stores continue to get burnt by what they perceive as trusted brands like SquareEnix, only to have their content rot on the shelves). With the digital storefront, there is no loss to the store owner (Sony) for failing products. Further, even if they lose what would be a good seller, there's always so much more content the next month (coupled with the hype of fanboys, the internet, and gamer "expos" like E3).

 

But anyway, blah blah blah? If any post deserves the tl;dr tag, it's this one. So, with that, I'm out.

 

Last one, too, I swear.  Really enjoyed this back-and-forth, however.  I'm also envious of your response organization, so here's my own brief ordered list:

 

1. Responding to a post isn't giving someone the last word, it's taking the last word.  

2. I didn't suggest effort doesn't imply quality; I suggested quality implies effort.  That's quite different.

 

p.s. I am solely a console gamer, and can't speak to things like Steam or tablet games intelligently.  Hopefully my points weren't confusing as a result.

[VerCettI]

Any of the Japanese plats that I've earned. I don't speak Japanese and therefore had no clue what was happening. I was just following a roadmap of which button to press. So it was pure trophy padding. I don't regret getting them but it was kinda silly since as I stated, I don't speak Japanese. 

[SINISTER-SINS_]

For the record, my platinums aren't stupid or dumb... they're autistic, so that makes them special ?

[rk325]

Not dumb but years ago as Blockbuster was closing, they were giving out game rentals for free, but most of the good games were gone, so for the pure purpose or renting games that were guaranteed platinums, I got Toy Story 3, Cloudy with a chance of Meatballs and Up.

[Oturan]

I am proud of all my platinums  no regrets

[ahmedelebiary]

My Name is Mayo  ?

[DividedByMankind]

none. I only play good games and top class games. and if i by accident start something i have to complete it for 100%, i dont play games just for trophies. i play games only for fun and the games i enjoy mostly, but i need the 100% annyways. 

[DrBloodmoney]

47 minutes ago, rk325 said:

Not dumb but years ago as Blockbuster was closing, they were giving out game rentals for free, but most of the good games were gone, so for the pure purpose or renting games that were guaranteed platinums, I got Toy Story 3, Cloudy with a chance of Meatballs and Up.

 

I never played the other two, but from what I remember Toy Story 3 was not too bad - certainly better than expected! 

[rk325]

2 hours ago, DrBloodmoney said:

 

I never played the other two, but from what I remember Toy Story 3 was not too bad - certainly better than expected! 

It was pretty good, to be honest. ?

[johnclark12]

My Name is Mayo or Nubla