Hitting the breaking point...

[Midnightwards666]

Well that's normal. Has anyone ever judged my profile? Probably... although publicly on Youtube, not yet. Do I care about the judgements? Not much, as I can't really stop them. It's only human nature. But whether one is judged to be the type to boost their PSN level as much as possible, have a high/low completion rate, only play games with platinums, play very hard ultra rare games or even be a completely fucking useless gamer... none of the aforementioned trophy hunting styles are right or wrong. 

Edited November 21, 2018 by Midnightwards666

[AJ_Radio]

1 hour ago, Midnightwards666 said:

Well that's normal. Has anyone ever judged my profile? Probably... although publicly on Youtube, not yet. Do I care about the judgements? Not much, as I can't really stop them. It's only human nature. But whether one is judged to be the type to boost their PSN level as much as possible, have a high/low completion rate, only play games with platinums, play very hard ultra rare games or even be a completely fucking useless gamer... none of the aforementioned trophy hunting styles are right or wrong. 

 

Any public setting you set foot on, if you have any presence then people are going to judge you.

 

So I guess your point is to play how you want to play?

 

Admittedly the reason I made this topic is to see how other people cope with a game that is too hard or strenuous, every once in a while I enjoy a challenge, but everyone has a certain limit. And when you surpass that limit, do you quit and move on, or keep trying to overcome that challenge you set as a goal?

[BrettyBoy]

When I reach 125 platinums, I plan to enjoy a game I play first before worrying about chasing the platinum.  I’m still gonna chase platinums and 100%’s but just won’t worry as much about them. I will also only be obtaining platinums and 100%’s on games I enjoy only after that too since I love the feeling of obtaining a platinum and 100% on a game I enjoy.

Edited November 21, 2018 by BrettyBoy

[AndresLionheart]

7 hours ago, NekoRave said:

I'd say the point is moreso you shouldn't have to be grieved because you have a low percentage.

 

I mean even you said earlier someone with a 10%-40% ratio is hardly a gamer and plays casually in your opinion, so the matter really is a flawed logic in judging anyone's account irrationally by general statistics.

 

Any public setting you can be judged you are right, but it doesn't always make it okay to have to deal with excessive Judgements especially general formed opinions that are only made based on how someone else plays/earns trophies.

 

As he said there is no right or wrong way to really go about hunting, everyone plays differently and since we all have the same hobby its imo ridiculous to have to always be harassed, judged, belittled, toxicly bullied, guilt tripped, feel useless, grieved, for doing literally the same hobby but have different statistics.

 

% doesnt matter its relative to how many games someone owns

 

And even if you had all easy games or all hardcore games nobody deserves to be separated from a community where everyone enjoys hunting for trophies in various forms.

 

Everyones a gamer and its genuinely the elitist mentality and the toxic mindset that imo isn't welcome publicly.

But the way you play does show what kind of gamer you are, and this even applies to specific games as well. In Street Fighter V, if you play Ibuki you most likely are a hyper aggresive player, if you like Guile, you are probably one of those assholes who down backs and plays very defensively, lol. See how I just judged a Guile player? That guy is free to play as he wants, but that's the life of a defensive type player.

The big difference here is that we are not playing against each other, but even if I see a Guile played against someone else I'm not gonna like it, but he doesn't have to give a shit, he shouldn't give a shit.

 

The thing with low completion is what it shows at first glance. Having a million games has nothing to do with completion, btw. It doesn't add to your % until you get at least 1 trophy.

An average completion of 10% makes someone think that you usually play a game for a short time until you start something different, which is basically what a casual does. You could have 3000 games on your list with the most complex 300 platinums and still be at 10% so people will still see your profile as a casual's. But that's how it goes when you have sooo many games that were barely played. It is like when someone reviews a game, writing a very thorough analysis, but everyone just skips to the number because screw reading the details.

 

If I added all my games to my list I would probably drop to like 20% completion. You are just the odd case of someone who changed focus a bit too late into their account. If you see my older games you'll see a lot of incomplete stuff, which is from before I cared about trophies that much (also, back then platinums were not handed out for free like 80% of games nowadays).

 

I would never "bully" someone for it, though. I would never bully anyone for anything thar they like to do. But that's humans... there are a lot of people who will look for the smallest thing to feel superior to someone else.

[FawltyPowers]

I don't think I've ever hit a breaking point, I've been annoyed and frustrated and I've certainly been tested, with the hardest challenge I had doing the trials on SSF4. I got around 10 characters completed using the pad but then I hit a brick wall with Dan's Trial 23, I just could not do it or even get close to doing it. Not only that I started to get what I believe was carpal tunnel syndrome.

 

That left me with a dilemma. Do I let this one go or do I buy an arcade stick and attempt them that way? In the end after a year or more break from the game I brought an arcade stick and slowly but surely worked through them. The hardest trial Ken 24 took me a total of over 18 hours to do over the course of 8 days. Now a lot of people would just say it's not worth it and I get that, that kind of dedication is not for everyone, but for me it was a challenge and I really enjoyed it, the satisfaction of achieving it was worth all the effort that went in. If I was having difficulty and it started to get to me then I would walk away and come back another day.

 

What if even with an arcade stick I hadn't beaten the trials, would that bother me? I actually don't think it would, it would sit on my profile as incomplete because I didn't have the ability to do it, it would show what my limits are, how far I can push, where I fail. That to me is just as important as your successes.

 

The only thing that does genuinely stress me is multiplayer. I try to avoid it like the plague because of the two incomplete games on my profile that have multiplayer trophies that can no longer be earned. When trophies are out of your control it makes me anxious. I want unachievable trophies to be because of my inability to achieve them, not because a developer decides to make them inaccessible.

 

I have other games that will appear on my profile at some point including Super Meat Boy, Enter The Gungeon, Binding of Isaac and Crypt of the Necrodancer. I'm not about to shy away from them because they are hard, if I can't do them then so be it, at least I tried.

[Midnightwards666]

10 hours ago, Spaz said:

 

Any public setting you set foot on, if you have any presence then people are going to judge you.

 

So I guess your point is to play how you want to play?

 

Admittedly the reason I made this topic is to see how other people cope with a game that is too hard or strenuous, every once in a while I enjoy a challenge, but everyone has a certain limit. And when you surpass that limit, do you quit and move on, or keep trying to overcome that challenge you set as a goal?

Yes, that is my point. Your gaming style will be visible through your trophy collection, but we shouldn't be deciding what is right or wrong. As for the second question, I have never abandoned a game because it's hard. I have never failed once either. If I am unmotivated to play anymore, I simply don't play. If I need a break, I take one. I never rush. 

[pinkrobot_pb]

Going through the time trials in Mirror's Edge right now I can suddenly imagine my own breaking point. I do not want to ruin my fond memories of a game by going through a lot of frustration just for the plat. I would rather stop at 49 stars out of 50 now then to look back at the game later and only remember how annoyed I was at the end.

[AJ_Radio]

On 11/21/2018 at 5:13 AM, AndresLionheart said:

But the way you play does show what kind of gamer you are, and this even applies to specific games as well. In Street Fighter V, if you play Ibuki you most likely are a hyper aggresive player, if you like Guile, you are probably one of those assholes who down backs and plays very defensively, lol. See how I just judged a Guile player? That guy is free to play as he wants, but that's the life of a defensive type player.

The big difference here is that we are not playing against each other, but even if I see a Guile played against someone else I'm not gonna like it, but he doesn't have to give a shit, he shouldn't give a shit.

 

Street Fighter has long been a franchise that takes a huge time commitment to master, and even more so if someone is going to try to be competitive playing online against human opponents.

 

Personally I absolutely cannot do Street Fighter, I couldn't get those platinums if my life depended on them. Those kinds of games just aren't for me, even though I loved those old classics Street Fighter II and their later iterations as a kid, I could never get past medium difficulty on them.

 

Someone like Guile who has a bunch of charge moves, one who is skilled enough could probably beat most casually aggressive players and so on. But his move set is basically defensive, that doesn't necessarily mean the player who is good at playing Guile is really a defensive type player in general.

 

On 11/21/2018 at 5:13 AM, AndresLionheart said:

The thing with low completion is what it shows at first glance. Having a million games has nothing to do with completion, btw. It doesn't add to your % until you get at least 1 trophy.

An average completion of 10% makes someone think that you usually play a game for a short time until you start something different, which is basically what a casual does. You could have 3000 games on your list with the most complex 300 platinums and still be at 10% so people will still see your profile as a casual's. But that's how it goes when you have sooo many games that were barely played. It is like when someone reviews a game, writing a very thorough analysis, but everyone just skips to the number because screw reading the details.

 

I don't consider anybody below 40 percent completion rate to be an actual trophy hunter.

 

A trophy hunter is somebody who works to obtain most if not all the trophies in a game to earn that platinum, not somebody who just plays for a few minutes or a few hours then moves on to another game. All the while leaving those games unfinished and NEVER finishing them.

 

People who have 300 - 600+ games on their account but with only around a 30 percent completion rate and 50 - 100 games completed are casuals to me. There is nothing wrong with either casuals or trophy hunters, they just approach games in a different manner. One strives to work and overcome challenges by earning trophies, the other plays purely for fun, and quits playing when the game has either lost it's luster or is too difficult for that player to progress.

 

You can have very difficult games completed and still have around a 10 percent completion, that's entirely possible. But I haven't found a single account on this website that has those statistics, and usually most people with around 10 percent completion can't be bothered to complete difficult games anyway.

 

On 11/21/2018 at 5:13 AM, AndresLionheart said:

If I added all my games to my list I would probably drop to like 20% completion. You are just the odd case of someone who changed focus a bit too late into their account. If you see my older games you'll see a lot of incomplete stuff, which is from before I cared about trophies that much (also, back then platinums were not handed out for free like 80% of games nowadays).
 

I would never "bully" someone for it, though. I would never bully anyone for anything thar they like to do. But that's humans... there are a lot of people who will look for the smallest thing to feel superior to someone else.

 

I don't think anybody really cared much at all about trophies back in 2008 - 2010. Playstation mostly took what Microsoft put down with Achievements, only a minority goes after Achievements to begin with.

 

The difference between now and then is there was a standard when it came to exactly how much content a game needed to have in order to have a platinum. Nowadays with games like Jack n' Jill DX and a slew of piss easy, low budget indie games that can be done in 20 - 30 minutes, platinums aren't exactly alluring anymore. But as long as you enjoy playing the games and earning the platinums, then that's really all that matters.

 

A certain YouTuber I know will tell you otherwise.

 

On 11/21/2018 at 6:39 AM, FawltyPowers said:

I don't think I've ever hit a breaking point, I've been annoyed and frustrated and I've certainly been tested, with the hardest challenge I had doing the trials on SSF4. I got around 10 characters completed using the pad but then I hit a brick wall with Dan's Trial 23, I just could not do it or even get close to doing it. Not only that I started to get what I believe was carpal tunnel syndrome.

 

That left me with a dilemma. Do I let this one go or do I buy an arcade stick and attempt them that way? In the end after a year or more break from the game I brought an arcade stick and slowly but surely worked through them. The hardest trial Ken 24 took me a total of over 18 hours to do over the course of 8 days. Now a lot of people would just say it's not worth it and I get that, that kind of dedication is not for everyone, but for me it was a challenge and I really enjoyed it, the satisfaction of achieving it was worth all the effort that went in. If I was having difficulty and it started to get to me then I would walk away and come back another day.

 

What if even with an arcade stick I hadn't beaten the trials, would that bother me? I actually don't think it would, it would sit on my profile as incomplete because I didn't have the ability to do it, it would show what my limits are, how far I can push, where I fail. That to me is just as important as your successes.

 

The only thing that does genuinely stress me is multiplayer. I try to avoid it like the plague because of the two incomplete games on my profile that have multiplayer trophies that can no longer be earned. When trophies are out of your control it makes me anxious. I want unachievable trophies to be because of my inability to achieve them, not because a developer decides to make them inaccessible.

 

I have other games that will appear on my profile at some point including Super Meat Boy, Enter The Gungeon, Binding of Isaac and Crypt of the Necrodancer. I'm not about to shy away from them because they are hard, if I can't do them then so be it, at least I tried.

 

There's no real workaround for multiplayer unless the developer decides to exclude any multiplayer activity for a trophy.

 

I absolutely despise boosting because it is simply work. I'm a guy who much prefers playing multiplayer to have fun, not to worry about a bunch of trophies that are soon to be unobtainable due to server closure. I took a little gamble with Playstation All-Stars Battle Royale but ended up getting the multiplayer trophies without much effort and time thankfully. Ended up boosting with two guys from Playstationtrophies.org, so all in all it wasn't bad.

 

I'm close to the platinum in Super Meat Boy, just need to put in a couple days of attempts for Girl Boy and probably a solid week or two for Impossible Boy. But don't even think about trying to finish Crypt of the Necrodancer. That is true insanity.

 

On 11/21/2018 at 6:48 AM, Midnightwards666 said:

Yes, that is my point. Your gaming style will be visible through your trophy collection, but we shouldn't be deciding what is right or wrong. As for the second question, I have never abandoned a game because it's hard. I have never failed once either. If I am unmotivated to play anymore, I simply don't play. If I need a break, I take one. I never rush. 

 

So you never approached a game that is beyond your skill?

 

I wholeheartedly understand needing a break from a game because it's too hard or frustrating. I've played plenty of games in my life where I needed a break, but like you I don't rush my games either.

 

In the past I gave up on a number of racing games and fighting games because they aren't my forte. But certain franchises like Street Fighter I am simply not good at. Like most people I have had fun casually played through the games, but when it comes to any sort of challenge it becomes too much.

[Midnightwards666]

6 hours ago, Spaz said:

So you never approached a game that is beyond your skill?

 

I wholeheartedly understand needing a break from a game because it's too hard or frustrating. I've played plenty of games in my life where I needed a break, but like you I don't rush my games either.

 

In the past I gave up on a number of racing games and fighting games because they aren't my forte. But certain franchises like Street Fighter I am simply not good at. Like most people I have had fun casually played through the games, but when it comes to any sort of challenge it becomes too much.

I have never found such a game, to be honest. I have missed 100% completions because of grindy trophies or because a game is shit... but I have never missed an 100% because of a challenge. I have played Retro/Grade, Bionic Commando Rearmed, Sonic & All-Stars Racing Transformed (no DLC), Q*bert Rebooted... all about 9/10 difficulty, and I beat all of them. Sadly I haven't got anything in my collection I would rate at 10/10, but even then I wouldn't shy away. The obvious PS3 recommendation for an extremely hard game is Cloudberry Kingdom, which I haven't done. I don't want to say it's beyond my capabilities, but I'm not tempted by it - luck appears to play a part and it looks way too frustrating. I don't think I would enjoy it very much, which is why I haven't played it. 

 

Do I enjoy a challenge in games? Yes, very much. At times it can certainly require a fair amount of energy, but the final reward makes the whole thing worth it. Enjoyment of the game, not rushing and a positive mindset is the key. My style of trophy hunting doesn't suit everyone, but it has always suited me perfectly fine. 

 

 

[Midnightwards666]

7 hours ago, Spaz said:

I don't consider anybody below 40 percent completion rate to be an actual trophy hunter.

 

A trophy hunter is somebody who works to obtain most if not all the trophies in a game to earn that platinum, not somebody who just plays for a few minutes or a few hours then moves on to another game. All the while leaving those games unfinished and NEVER finishing them.

Perhaps with the exception of those who intentionally kill their completion percentage with the intention of restarting later. NekoRave (13% completion) has an extremely unusual style. Just one look at his page shows that he is intentionally adding incomplete games to his list - many of his recent games are 100%, and a lot of 1% games were added in bulks. I can't imagine how he will ever even come close to catching up with his backlog though. 

 

Those who just play a game for 30 minutes and later forget about it are not trophy hunters. NekoRave is not that though. Everyone defines the term ''trophy hunter'' differently. Despite our discussion about the hard games, one could even say that I'm not a trophy hunter - my completion is 70%, but I don't care about 5% or 100% completion, bronzes or platinums, my level or anything typically regarded as valuable in a trophy hunter's collection. I just play what I like. If the game is good, I get as many trophies as I can. If the game is shit, I leave it at 5%. If half of the trophies are fun and half grindy, then I earn half the trophies. If a trophy requires excessive grinding, I just ignore it. 

Edited November 25, 2018 by Midnightwards666

[AJ_Radio]

1 hour ago, Midnightwards666 said:

I have never found such a game, to be honest. I have missed 100% completions because of grindy trophies or because a game is shit... but I have never missed an 100% because of a challenge. I have played Retro/Grade, Bionic Commando Rearmed, Sonic & All-Stars Racing Transformed (no DLC), Q*bert Rebooted... all about 9/10 difficulty, and I beat all of them. Sadly I haven't got anything in my collection I would rate at 10/10, but even then I wouldn't shy away. The obvious PS3 recommendation for an extremely hard game is Cloudberry Kingdom, which I haven't done. I don't want to say it's beyond my capabilities, but I'm not tempted by it - luck appears to play a part and it looks way too frustrating. I don't think I would enjoy it very much, which is why I haven't played it. 

 

Do I enjoy a challenge in games? Yes, very much. At times it can certainly require a fair amount of energy, but the final reward makes the whole thing worth it. Enjoyment of the game, not rushing and a positive mindset is the key. My style of trophy hunting doesn't suit everyone, but it has always suited me perfectly fine.

 

I like your style. Striving to overcome a challenge is always a good feeling when you finally beat it.

 

The most obvious game I have on my profile that borders at a 9/10 or 10/10 in difficulty in Super Meat Boy. Despite it's difficulty, it is never unfair. You always get a second chance, and no death runs you lose at most maybe 5 to 15 minutes of progress. So it's never extremely frustrating or cruel. But even with that in place I still had to spend 10 - 12 hours on each of the last three no death run trophies I got, resulting in 30 - 36 hours of play time total. Definitely very difficult, with Impossible Boy being the worst.

 

Dark Souls is a franchise that is known for it's difficulty despite all the games having relatively high trophy percentages. If the games are good enough people stick around to finish them. Horizon Zero Dawn, God of War and Spider-Man all have relatively high trophy percentages despite the games each taking around 30 to 40 hours to finish. Shouldn't always judge a game's difficulty by the trophy percentages.

 

If I get too frustrated I spend a couple days or so not playing any games or turning on my consoles even. I do other activities, sometimes that is good to get me to finish a game I have put off or quit due to difficulty or boredom or frustration.

 

1 hour ago, Midnightwards666 said:

Perhaps with the exception of those who intentionally kill their completion percentage with the intention of restarting later. NekoRave (13% completion) has an extremely unusual style. Just one look at his page shows that he is intentionally adding incomplete games to his list - many of his recent games are 100%, and a lot of 1% games were added in bulks. I can't imagine how he will ever even come close to catching up with his backlog though. 

 

Those who just play a game for 30 minutes and later forget about it are not trophy hunters. NekoRave is not that though. Everyone defines the term ''trophy hunter'' differently. Despite our discussion about the hard games, one could even say that I'm not a trophy hunter - my completion is 70%, but I don't care about 5% or 100% completion, bronzes or platinums, my level or anything typically regarded as valuable in a trophy hunter's collection. I just play what I like. If the game is good, I get as many trophies as I can. If the game is shit, I leave it at 5%. If half of the trophies are fun and half grindy, then I earn half the trophies. If a trophy requires excessive grinding, I just ignore it. 

 

In total I have around 350 - 400 games including the ones I already have on my profile. Putting all those games on at once would certainly drop my completion rate to around 50 percent or so. I just don't like seeing a bunch of incomplete games on my list, just something about having my profile look orderly is what I prefer.

 

I guess that's why Spider-Man, Horizon Zero Dawn and the Souls games have so many platinum achievers. A well balanced list that gives players something to strive for.

 

Orc Slayer is an example of a shit game but it's platinum is common because it's very short, only taking 3 to 4 hours to finish. On the other hand, a game like Vanquish has an ultra rare platinum because of the challenges, which many people can't do. Dead Space 2 is left incomplete quite a lot because of Hard Core difficulty, the ability to only save 3 times puts a lot of pressure on players. I am convinced that without that trophy Dead Space 2 would be a rare platinum instead of very rare.

 

I find a LOT of PSN games, especially the old titles from 2007 - 2010 have very low percentages, I found a few of them run poorly and a lot of people don't play on the PS3 anymore. Today however if you have $10 and a few region accounts you can buy a bunch of games like Jack n' Jill DX on a budget price, complete those stacks in their corresponding regions, and get several platinums in a matter of hours. I think that's boring, uninspired and just lazy, I want something that rewards me for the work I put into it.

[AffectatiousDonk]

9 hours ago, Spaz said:

 

I like your style. Striving to overcome a challenge is always a good feeling when you finally beat it.

 

The most obvious game I have on my profile that borders at a 9/10 or 10/10 in difficulty in Super Meat Boy. Despite it's difficulty, it is never unfair. You always get a second chance, and no death runs you lose at most maybe 5 to 15 minutes of progress. So it's never extremely frustrating or cruel. But even with that in place I still had to spend 10 - 12 hours on each of the last three no death run trophies I got, resulting in 30 - 36 hours of play time total. Definitely very difficult, with Impossible Boy being the worst.

 

Dark Souls is a franchise that is known for it's difficulty despite all the games having relatively high trophy percentages. If the games are good enough people stick around to finish them. Horizon Zero Dawn, God of War and Spider-Man all have relatively high trophy percentages despite the games each taking around 30 to 40 hours to finish. Shouldn't always judge a game's difficulty by the trophy percentages.

 

If I get too frustrated I spend a couple days or so not playing any games or turning on my consoles even. I do other activities, sometimes that is good to get me to finish a game I have put off or quit due to difficulty or boredom or frustration.

 

 

In total I have around 350 - 400 games including the ones I already have on my profile. Putting all those games on at once would certainly drop my completion rate to around 50 percent or so. I just don't like seeing a bunch of incomplete games on my list, just something about having my profile look orderly is what I prefer.

 

I guess that's why Spider-Man, Horizon Zero Dawn and the Souls games have so many platinum achievers. A well balanced list that gives players something to strive for.

 

Orc Slayer is an example of a shit game but it's platinum is common because it's very short, only taking 3 to 4 hours to finish. On the other hand, a game like Vanquish has an ultra rare platinum because of the challenges, which many people can't do. Dead Space 2 is left incomplete quite a lot because of Hard Core difficulty, the ability to only save 3 times puts a lot of pressure on players. I am convinced that without that trophy Dead Space 2 would be a rare platinum instead of very rare.

 

I find a LOT of PSN games, especially the old titles from 2007 - 2010 have very low percentages, I found a few of them run poorly and a lot of people don't play on the PS3 anymore. Today however if you have $10 and a few region accounts you can buy a bunch of games like Jack n' Jill DX on a budget price, complete those stacks in their corresponding regions, and get several platinums in a matter of hours. I think that's boring, uninspired and just lazy, I want something that rewards me for the work I put into it.

 

I find you fascinating Sir. I think you have alot to say. Some of it interests me. What I would really like to read from you though is your opinions on the games you are playing. I love hearing about what people like or dislike. I don't really care for generalisations they are just well general right. Anyway I see you post on here alot. I really look forward to when you shift that energy into writing about your experience with games. Don't worry about others they can tell there own story much better than anyone else. Your experience is valid, just write about that. 

Edited November 26, 2018 by Cjshai

[Dauersack]

Not an easy topic. I have been gaming for a long time, I have been on ps1 and ps2, but i thought the ps3 was so shit at release that I just decided to skip it, not knowing at that point that the generation would last so absurdly long. At some point I just felt like it was too late to join because I could just as easily wait for the ps4, which I ended up doing, and then I was confronted with trophies for the first time. I always was a completionist, I played every game 100%, even looked for eastereggs and other hidden stuff, played through games with handicaps or gave myself an extra goal to reach. So naturally trophies immediately interested me because getting all of them meant you had more or less the games approval to leave, the confirmation that you did everything important. Back then I never feared a challenge, the first games in my life were hard platformers, frustrating as hell games like megaman. You had to master those games to win them and playing them gave you a high tolerance for frustration.

 

Nowadays, having a game incomplete still bothers me, to the point that I therefore actually check the trophies first before I get a new game. I will never get a game that has broken trophies or unobtainable ones due to server shut downs, because if I ever quit getting 100% for good then it should be because a game forced me to give up, not because of bugs or other shit, and i will not get grindy games I dislike the core gameplay of, like the recently free on psplus Friday the 13th. My tenacity is the stuff of legends among my friends, as I have done things they thought were insane over the years, I even came back to games to finish them years after throwing them aside, one way or another I have always finished every game I could think of. So what trophies a game has influences whether i buy it or not to a certain extend, but I would never shy away from getting a game I really want no matter how hard or grindy the platinum is. The proof of that is the fact that on my account I have one of the hardest games to platinum (Super Meat Boy) still ahead of me (I got that because it was free back then), as well as a true candidate game for the top 5 grindiest platinums of all time, Orcs Must Die Unchained, and I will get both of them at some point.

 

My account still reflects my past behavior quite well. No game has broken me yet, and yes I know that is quite easy to say with the tiny number of games I managed to play on my account so far. Funnily enough, a while ago I thought for sure Super Meat Boy did it. I more or less gave up on it because I thought there was just no way I could ever get that platinum. I kinda passed on other trophies as well, I did not want to platinum Tomb Raider due to its absolutely atrocious multiplayer, I did not want to put tedious hours into the single bronze trophy I was missing in Ground Zeroes. But I recently, after like 3 years, came back to them and finished both of these games, like I always did. I will continue to do that because every time I check my profile and see games that have been unfinished for a long time I get annoyed and at some point that pisses me off more than the thought powering through the missing parts of the games. This clean up tour that saw me finishing Tomb Raider, Ground Zeroes, Outlast and Final Fantasy 7 reminded me that I will never stop trying to finish a game, just delay it to do other games first, or delay it to stop me from going insane. When the list of games I have ready to start on my ps4 runs out, and it will, then still waiting there are Kingdom Come Deliverance dlc(horrible game experience) and Super Meat Boy ironman runs.

 

For some people this seems like I torture myself, but getting it done in the end is always worth it because powering through a very tough section of a game creates long lasting memories and genuine feel good moments for every milestone reached. Also it stops things from getting too boring, maybe that is just me but if i breeze through too many easy levels in a row it just does not feel right.

Edited November 26, 2018 by Nighcisama

[Elvick_]

Personally not going to do super hard stuff. I mean, I guess in some ways I'm sticking through with some hard things... Flappy Goat comes to mind for Goat Simulator... what a garbage trophy in an otherwise fine plat. It made me go from "This is a dumb game, but I like it for what it is." (albeit think it's too glitchy, and people are too quick to go 'it's supposed to be bad!' to excuse the criticisms...) but that one trophy/minigame made me loathe the game. And I still have to do the rest of the DLC. If only I played the PS3 version. It would've been done forever.

But, I just play what I want. I generally drop a game quick if it frustrates me. Unless I feel otherwise motivated, often through a story. If Super Meat Boy didn't have a story, I probably never would've finished it at all. It was quite frustrating at points, and I didn't even do everything. Don't think I finished the Dark World...

It has little to do with trophies specifically, because there are games without them that I still need to get back to and finish because I just got frustrated because I wasn't good enough to get through whatever part I was at, or got confused on how to progress. Trophies add a new layer to that when they have unique unlock requirements. I just try to do what I can. And only find myself pushing if I'm super close to a plat.

 

That's why I never bothered with the competitive MP trophies in Uncharted. Or most online trophies in general. I just find it too stressful to even play, let alone get the requirements needed in most of them. If people read my status updates for SCVI, they know that. Took me over 40 games to get my 5 ranked wins and it was incredibly stressful for me. [thinking back 10 of the plays were casual so didn't count]

It's why I don't tend to buy anything with procedurally generated levels anymore, because it's too annoying. I can eventually learn the patterns of actual level design and enemy placement and trial and error my way through, with dedication... but the randomness is just not fun for me at all. Some may love the 'endless' playability, but it's not for me.

[AJ_Radio]

4 hours ago, Cjshai said:

 

I find you fascinating Sir. I think you have alot to say. Some of it interests me. What I would really like to read from you though is your opinions on the games you are playing. I love hearing about what people like or dislike. I don't really care for generalisations they are just well general right. Anyway I see you post on here alot. I really look forward to when you shift that energy into writing about your experience with games. Don't worry about others they can tell there own story much better than anyone else. Your experience is valid, just write about that. 

 

Thank you for the compliment.

 

I often write a quick review on a game I finished or make a status update on my feelings about it. I was going to participate in the Kill Your Completion event but due to time constraints and real life work I had to drop it.

 

1 hour ago, Nighcisama said:

Not an easy topic. I have been gaming for a long time, I have been on ps1 and ps2, but i thought the ps3 was so shit at release that I just decided to skip it, not knowing at that point that the generation would last so absurdly long. At some point I just felt like it was too late to join because I could just as easily wait for the ps4, which I ended up doing, and then I was confronted with trophies for the first time. I always was a completionist, I played every game 100%, even looked for eastereggs and other hidden stuff, played through games with handicaps or gave myself an extra goal to reach. So naturally trophies immediately interested me because getting all of them meant you had more or less the games approval to leave, the confirmation that you did everything important. Back then I never feared a challenge, the first games in my life were hard platformers, frustrating as hell games like megaman. You had to master those games to win them and playing them gave you a high tolerance for frustration.

 

I have high respect for any kid back in the 1980s who managed to complete the first Mega Man game. That game was hard as nails on the NES. I actually didn't get around to that game until the late 1990s - early 2000s since I was much too young to play that and it's sequel when they came out.

 

It's pretty interesting how so many games back then were difficult and overly frustrating, yet nowadays the idea is to make the games as easy and accessible as possible.

 

1 hour ago, Nighcisama said:

Nowadays, having a game incomplete still bothers me, to the point that I therefore actually check the trophies first before I get a new game. I will never get a game that has broken trophies or unobtainable ones due to server shut downs, because if I ever quit getting 100% for good then it should be because a game forced me to give up, not because of bugs or other shit, and i will not get grindy games I dislike the core gameplay of, like the recently free on psplus Friday the 13th. My tenacity is the stuff of legends among my friends, as I have done things they thought were insane over the years, I even came back to games to finish them years after throwing them aside, one way or another I have always finished every game I could think of. So what trophies a game has influences whether i buy it or not to a certain extend, but I would never shy away from getting a game I really want no matter how hard or grindy the platinum is. The proof of that is the fact that on my account I have one of the hardest games to platinum (Super Meat Boy) still ahead of me (I got that because it was free back then), as well as a true candidate game for the top 5 grindiest platinums of all time, Orcs Must Die Unchained, and I will get both of them at some point.

 

My account still reflects my past behavior quite well. No game has broken me yet, and yes I know that is quite easy to say with the tiny number of games I managed to play on my account so far. Funnily enough, a while ago I thought for sure Super Meat Boy did it. I more or less gave up on it because I thought there was just no way I could ever get that platinum. I kinda passed on other trophies as well, I did not want to platinum Tomb Raider due to its absolutely atrocious multiplayer, I did not want to put tedious hours into the single bronze trophy I was missing in Ground Zeroes. But I recently, after like 3 years, came back to them and finished both of these games, like I always did. I will continue to do that because every time I check my profile and see games that have been unfinished for a long time I get annoyed and at some point that pisses me off more than the thought powering through the missing parts of the games. This clean up tour that saw me finishing Tomb Raider, Ground Zeroes, Outlast and Final Fantasy 7 reminded me that I will never stop trying to finish a game, just delay it to do other games first, or delay it to stop me from going insane. When the list of games I have ready to start on my ps4 runs out, and it will, then still waiting there are Kingdom Come Deliverance dlc(horrible game experience) and Super Meat Boy ironman runs.

 

For some people this seems like I torture myself, but getting it done in the end is always worth it because powering through a very tough section of a game creates long lasting memories and genuine feel good moments for every milestone reached. Also it stops things from getting too boring, maybe that is just me but if i breeze through too many easy levels in a row it just does not feel right.

 

I tried my best to complete a lot of games back on the Nintendo 64. Goldeneye 007, Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, Super Mario 64 among other games were titles I put countless hours into exploring every possible secret. I didn't realize you could get a 7th star in Super Mario 64 by collecting a certain amount of coins until over a year after I first got the game.

 

Gameplay walkthroughs weren't as common nor as good back then either, so you mostly had to rely on yourself and a magazine like Nintendo Power to help you.

 

Personally I am not satisfied with having a bunch of E ranks on my profile or just having an account that has a lot of unfinished games. I feel that if you paid $60 for a game, played for a few hours to gain a couple trophies then just left it to forever be collecting dust then you have wasted your money. If I was purely casual I would do my best to get the story done before I move on to something else, as anything before that is just a waste.

 

A and B ranks are satisfactory enough for me if I cannot earn the platinum or earn the 100 percent. If the game is atrocious I may quit and move on before I even finish the story, but so far I haven't found anything that bad.

 

Runescape and World of Warcraft gave me this behavior of having a habit of trying to get most if not all the achievements and skills. In World of Warcraft I used to go after these utterly trivial achievements just to say I got them. As a trophy hunter I mostly strive for trophies before I find them enjoyable.

 

I have to agree with you. I just think going for 10 - 20 easy games in a row is utterly boring. Downwell was the last challenging game I played and beating it gives off a lasting impression that easier games don't. People are free to play what they want, some like a challenge and for others they are perfectly content with playing just easy games.

 

1 hour ago, Elvick_ said:

Personally not going to do super hard stuff. I mean, I guess in some ways I'm sticking through with some hard things... Flappy Goat comes to mind for Goat Simulator... what a garbage trophy in an otherwise fine plat. It made me go from "This is a dumb game, but I like it for what it is." (albeit think it's too glitchy, and people are too quick to go 'it's supposed to be bad!' to excuse the criticisms...) but that one trophy/minigame made me loathe the game. And I still have to do the rest of the DLC. If only I played the PS3 version. It would've been done forever.

But, I just play what I want. I generally drop a game quick if it frustrates me. Unless I feel otherwise motivated, often through a story. If Super Meat Boy didn't have a story, I probably never would've finished it at all. It was quite frustrating at points, and I didn't even do everything. Don't think I finished the Dark World...

It has little to do with trophies specifically, because there are games without them that I still need to get back to and finish because I just got frustrated because I wasn't good enough to get through whatever part I was at, or got confused on how to progress. Trophies add a new layer to that when they have unique unlock requirements. I just try to do what I can. And only find myself pushing if I'm super close to a plat.

 

That's why I never bothered with the competitive MP trophies in Uncharted. Or most online trophies in general. I just find it too stressful to even play, let alone get the requirements needed in most of them. If people read my status updates for SCVI, they know that. Took me over 40 games to get my 5 ranked wins and it was incredibly stressful for me. [thinking back 10 of the plays were casual so didn't count]

It's why I don't tend to buy anything with procedurally generated levels anymore, because it's too annoying. I can eventually learn the patterns of actual level design and enemy placement and trial and error my way through, with dedication... but the randomness is just not fun for me at all. Some may love the 'endless' playability, but it's not for me.

 

Goat Simulator was basically a laughing stock from the beginning. Flappy Goat is frustrating becuase the minigame plays differently from anything else the game has to offer. In my opinion that trophy is highly overrated, I didn't find it that hard at all.

 

I completely understand dropping Super Meat Boy. Not everyone has the skill and commitment required to get that platinum. I'm still working towards it every now and then but due to work I just haven't had the time to knock out the last trophies I need.

 

I have no problems with most of the Assassins Creed games for example because they're generally easy and were made to appeal to a wide audience. The trophies, with the exception of the 100 percent sync ones aren't that bad. Multiplayer however is a different story.

 

In the past I have had absolutely horrific experiences playing World of Warcraft and it's elitism mentality when it comes to raid groups. Because of that I'm usually hesitant to play most games out there that involve spending more than a few hours on multiplayer for the platinum. Getting those DLC trophies in Uncharted 2 and 3 is simply not feasible for me because I have to dedicate around 250 - 300 hours to get them all. And now that we're an entire generation past and it's pretty much impossible to get those trophies without a good boosting group anyway, I decided years ago that I was simply going to ignore them and move on.

 

I've been on the fence about whether or not to start The Last of Us. You have to spend 26 - 28 hours in multiplayer, and if you have the PS3 version you have to boost for those DLC trophies. That is bordering on my decision to drop games with multiplayer that take more than a few hours, because to me it just isn't worth it. That's why most of the games on my list are strictly single player, if I see a game like Friday the 13th that is going to take a hundred or two hundred hours of multiplayer, I'm not going to bother getting it at all. Monster Hunter World is another game I decided to skip buying.

 

Of the randomly generated games I've played, Rogue Legacy wasn't too bad. Downwell was difficult because of the black and white aesthetic and the sprites looking like old NES characters.

 

Bit surprised you managed to finish Spec Ops: The Line. I'm usually fairly decent at third person shooters and even I found the game rather tough at times.

Edited November 26, 2018 by Spaz

[Elvick_]

1 hour ago, Spaz said:

Goat Simulator was basically a laughing stock from the beginning. Flappy Goat is frustrating becuase the minigame plays differently from anything else the game has to offer. In my opinion that trophy is highly overrated, I didn't find it that hard at all.

 

I completely understand dropping Super Meat Boy. Not everyone has the skill and commitment required to get that platinum. I'm still working towards it every now and then but due to work I just haven't had the time to knock out the last trophies I need.

 

I have no problems with most of the Assassins Creed games for example because they're generally easy and were made to appeal to a wide audience. The trophies, with the exception of the 100 percent sync ones aren't that bad. Multiplayer however is a different story.

 

In the past I have had absolutely horrific experiences playing World of Warcraft and it's elitism mentality when it comes to raid groups. Because of that I'm usually hesitant to play most games out there that involve spending more than a few hours on multiplayer for the platinum. Getting those DLC trophies in Uncharted 2 and 3 is simply not feasible for me because I have to dedicate around 250 - 300 hours to get them all. And now that we're an entire generation past and it's pretty much impossible to get those trophies without a good boosting group anyway, I decided years ago that I was simply going to ignore them and move on.

 

I've been on the fence about whether or not to start The Last of Us. You have to spend 26 - 28 hours in multiplayer, and if you have the PS3 version you have to boost for those DLC trophies. That is bordering on my decision to drop games with multiplayer that take more than a few hours, because to me it just isn't worth it. That's why most of the games on my list are strictly single player, if I see a game like Friday the 13th that is going to take a hundred or two hundred hours of multiplayer, I'm not going to bother getting it at all. Monster Hunter World is another game I decided to skip buying.

 

Of the randomly generated games I've played, Rogue Legacy wasn't too bad. Downwell was difficult because of the black and white aesthetic and the sprites looking like old NES characters.

 

Bit surprised you managed to finish Spec Ops: The Line. I'm usually fairly decent at third person shooters and even I found the game rather tough at times.

Flappy Goat is objectively shit. Look up the hit boxes, that alone is why it's so shit. If it weren't for the massive hitboxes that extend beyond the actual sprite on screen it would be piss easy. Like if it played like a good game of that kind. I've played endless amounts of games like that, but they had actual hitboxes that were worth a damn. Rather than just random nonsense you can't see [much like the Super Meat Boy levels for The Kid - wouldn't be nearly as bad if not for the shitty hitboxes in those levels]. If you die from something it needs to have a visual representation of what killed you so it's not bullshit. If not, then it's just bad game design. And Flappy Bird is the epitome of bad design. And it's not even a hard type of game to do correctly either. Literally nobody thinks it's "hard", it's just bullshit because the developers are incompetent.

Speaking of The Last of Us, that's a game I found hard even on normal so I just resigned to having barely any trophies in that game (still haven't finished the story on PS4...). MP, same thing with Uncharted. I actually dropped the difficulty down iirc in TLoU in that section where you're in a basement with no lights, and water and have to activate a generator. lol

Spec Ops: The Line has a few problem areas for sure. But having gotten through Brutal in U1 and U2 Remasters... it's not nearly as bad as that. Granted, I cheated in those with the... well, cheats. 1 hit kills, but it's only fair given that they one hit kill you half the time. 2 hits if you're lucky. But yeah, Spec Ops had it's moments of pure frustration, but I love the game and really wanted to plat it for my 150th milestone. So I had the dedication to do it. And it only took me 5 years and 8 months to find the drive to do it!

[AJ_Radio]

8 hours ago, Elvick_ said:

Flappy Goat is objectively shit. Look up the hit boxes, that alone is why it's so shit. If it weren't for the massive hitboxes that extend beyond the actual sprite on screen it would be piss easy. Like if it played like a good game of that kind. I've played endless amounts of games like that, but they had actual hitboxes that were worth a damn. Rather than just random nonsense you can't see [much like the Super Meat Boy levels for The Kid - wouldn't be nearly as bad if not for the shitty hitboxes in those levels]. If you die from something it needs to have a visual representation of what killed you so it's not bullshit. If not, then it's just bad game design. And Flappy Bird is the epitome of bad design. And it's not even a hard type of game to do correctly either. Literally nobody thinks it's "hard", it's just bullshit because the developers are incompetent.

 

Flappy Goat was poorly designed and conceived. But it’s nowhere near as difficult as beating The Kid’s warpzone. 

 

The Kid’s warpzone was difficult because of the tight platforming required to beat it. That level is pure skill, sure I spent hours trying to beat it but never did I once get frustrated over it because of how well the game mechanics are in Super Meat Boy. 

 

I spent around 12 hours getting Demon Boy. One of the hardest things I ever done in my 25 years of gaming. But to me, there is no shitty hitbox in Super Meat Boy. 

 

In Flappy Goat sure, Goat Simulator was basically a game to mess around with because of the different abilities and mods. It’s a big spoof on pop culture. 

 

8 hours ago, Elvick_ said:

Speaking of The Last of Us, that's a game I found hard even on normal so I just resigned to having barely any trophies in that game (still haven't finished the story on PS4...). MP, same thing with Uncharted. I actually dropped the difficulty down iirc in TLoU in that section where you're in a basement with no lights, and water and have to activate a generator. lol

 

The Last of Us puts a lot of emphasis on stealth, the style is quite different from Uncharted, Call of Duty or your typical open world game. To me it’s not as difficult as the Metal Gear Solid games, but TLoU was made to be a survival horror where you have to conserve supplies. 

 

Grounded Plus difficulty I haven’t tried yet but I hear it’s rather difficult. 

 

Still I’m a bit irritated they make you play 26 - 28 hours for multiplayer, and that goes right along with Naughty Dog’s idea of adding Survival DLC to Uncharted 4, which you absolutely must boost with other players. I don’t like boosting, so it’ll probably be a long time before I get around to that. 

 

8 hours ago, Elvick_ said:

Spec Ops: The Line has a few problem areas for sure. But having gotten through Brutal in U1 and U2 Remasters... it's not nearly as bad as that. Granted, I cheated in those with the... well, cheats. 1 hit kills, but it's only fair given that they one hit kill you half the time. 2 hits if you're lucky. But yeah, Spec Ops had it's moments of pure frustration, but I love the game and really wanted to plat it for my 150th milestone. So I had the dedication to do it. And it only took me 5 years and 8 months to find the drive to do it!

 

I think it’s only fair to use cheats for Brutal difficulty because those Uncharted games are a mess on that level. I don’t think they were meant for that difficulty. 

 

- For example, relying on RNG to get past a QTE section near the end in Uncharted 1 because of the barrels only to have Navarro’s henchmen kill you in 1 - 2 hits. 

 

The jeep section was another thrilling experience on Brutal.

 

- The train section in Uncharted 2 where enemies snipe you while you’re on top of the train cars. 

 

- The section in Syria on Uncharted 3 where Charlie Cutter and everyone else drops their guns and you have to run away from gunfire. 

 

Those Brutal difficulty trophies would of been ultra rare were it not for cheats. 

 

Spec Ops: The Line I was familiar with on the second playthrough, but I still died a lot in certain sections. The beginning of Chapters 6 and 13, and the section where you have to run from a helicopter. 

 

Definitely recommend for anyone who enjoys third person shooters.

[Elvick_]

8 hours ago, Spaz said:

 

Flappy Goat was poorly designed and conceived. But it’s nowhere near as difficult as beating The Kid’s warpzone. 

 

The Kid’s warpzone was difficult because of the tight platforming required to beat it. That level is pure skill, sure I spent hours trying to beat it but never did I once get frustrated over it because of how well the game mechanics are in Super Meat Boy. 

 

I spent around 12 hours getting Demon Boy. One of the hardest things I ever done in my 25 years of gaming. But to me, there is no shitty hitbox in Super Meat Boy. 

 

In Flappy Goat sure, Goat Simulator was basically a game to mess around with because of the different abilities and mods. It’s a big spoof on pop culture. 

 

 

The Last of Us puts a lot of emphasis on stealth, the style is quite different from Uncharted, Call of Duty or your typical open world game. To me it’s not as difficult as the Metal Gear Solid games, but TLoU was made to be a survival horror where you have to conserve supplies. 

 

Grounded Plus difficulty I haven’t tried yet but I hear it’s rather difficult. 

 

Still I’m a bit irritated they make you play 26 - 28 hours for multiplayer, and that goes right along with Naughty Dog’s idea of adding Survival DLC to Uncharted 4, which you absolutely must boost with other players. I don’t like boosting, so it’ll probably be a long time before I get around to that. 

 

 

I think it’s only fair to use cheats for Brutal difficulty because those Uncharted games are a mess on that level. I don’t think they were meant for that difficulty. 

 

- For example, relying on RNG to get past a QTE section near the end in Uncharted 1 because of the barrels only to have Navarro’s henchmen kill you in 1 - 2 hits. 

 

The jeep section was another thrilling experience on Brutal.

 

- The train section in Uncharted 2 where enemies snipe you while you’re on top of the train cars. 

 

- The section in Syria on Uncharted 3 where Charlie Cutter and everyone else drops their guns and you have to run away from gunfire. 

 

Those Brutal difficulty trophies would of been ultra rare were it not for cheats. 

 

Spec Ops: The Line I was familiar with on the second playthrough, but I still died a lot in certain sections. The beginning of Chapters 6 and 13, and the section where you have to run from a helicopter. 

 

Definitely recommend for anyone who enjoys third person shooters.

I'm sorry, but you're objectively wrong about The Kid levels. The sprites of the spikes are not the actual killbox of the spikes. You will struggle because you die from nothing (visually). This is a fact. The spike curves, and that misleads where the hitbox actually is. That is the exact same problem with Flappy Goat. The Kid levels were hard because the tight platforming, difficulty compounded by the shitty hitboxes on the spikes killing you when you don't even touch the spikes. Because those specific levels are poorly designed. It's not a problem in the main game, and I don't remember them in any of the other side levels I did. But it actually is a problem in those shitty levels.

 

Turn this on .25 he doesn't touch the spike, yet dies. Hmm. But no it's fine. It's not like I've done the entire thing and would know at all how it works. Except I did and do. Since I have eyeballs. Or 4:54... no it's fine, you're supposed to die from the air around spikes. It's like invisible poison. Or... orrrrrr, the visuals do not actually represent the actual killbox. As I said.

 

I actually got through the helicopter part first try on FUBAR, but it took me like 10 tries on the previous difficulty. :/ I hate sections like that. Brutal was ridiculous on Uncharted 1 & 2, haven't even touched 3 yet. But, man... the running sections are just awful, and the checkpoints where you die instantly. It's obvious the game wasn't playtested for this mode which is a shame. Bluepoint are usually excellent developers and the other stuff they added was cool. But brutal was just unbalanced. Even Spec Ops The Line knew the helicopter part was b/s that's why they instantly restore your health at certain points while you run through. Doesn't help survive necessarily, but they know if you had to recover health normally you'd definitely die. If I were them that would've been where I would say, "maybe we should just remove this section or make it a cutscene instead". Because when you have to change the way the health works just so people survive it, you've messed things up.

And that damn jeep in U1... it took me so long to finally get through that on Brutal. Worst part was the [lack of] checkpoints.

[AJ_Radio]

5 hours ago, Elvick_ said:

I'm sorry, but you're objectively wrong about The Kid levels. The sprites of the spikes are not the actual killbox of the spikes. You will struggle because you die from nothing (visually). This is a fact. The spike curves, and that misleads where the hitbox actually is. That is the exact same problem with Flappy Goat. The Kid levels were hard because the tight platforming, difficulty compounded by the shitty hitboxes on the spikes killing you when you don't even touch the spikes. Because those specific levels are poorly designed. It's not a problem in the main game, and I don't remember them in any of the other side levels I did. But it actually is a problem in those shitty levels.

 

Turn this on .25 he doesn't touch the spike, yet dies. Hmm. But no it's fine. It's not like I've done the entire thing and would know at all how it works. Except I did and do. Since I have eyeballs. Or 4:54... no it's fine, you're supposed to die from the air around spikes. It's like invisible poison. Or... orrrrrr, the visuals do not actually represent the actual killbox. As I said.

 

The ONLY SECTIONS that most people will have trouble on will be in the first two sections of the Warpzone. There is some extremely tight platforming in the middle where you have to plan ahead and be very precise with your jumps. This is where I failed the MOST out of the entire warpzone, I had to spend hours the first time around getting good at this part.

 

For the second section you have to move back and forth in those tight areas. Not as bad in my opinion compared to the first section. The third section is just a matter of jumping over those moving spikes going horizontally.

 

In Flappy Goat it's extremely easy to die when you're not even touching the obstacles. You can be several pixels off and still fail. In the Kid's Warpzone it's maybe what, one or two pixels off? It's a lot more fair than Flappy Goat, which was designed poorly, and the entire game Goat Simulator was meant to be taken as a joke and a spoof.

[pinkrobot_pb]

19 minutes ago, Spaz said:

In Flappy Goat it's extremely easy to die when you're not even touching the obstacles. You can be several pixels off and still fail. In the Kid's Warpzone it's maybe what, one or two pixels off? It's a lot more fair than Flappy Goat, which was designed poorly, and the entire game Goat Simulator was meant to be taken as a joke and a spoof.

 

In Flappy Goat it is indeed because the hibox of your goat is bigger than just the sprite. Imagine a picture with that sprite on it and without any margins. It will still have space in the corners or along edges where there is image but not sprite. What I did was imagine the hitbox image while playing and not just look at the sprite. It did instantly become a lot easier and failing felt less random and annoying. It only took about 10 attempts for me on PS4. And that is hardly skill related, because I usually suck at these type of games because of old fingers and terrible reflexes. You should have seen me with Teslagrad, it was bad.

 

As far as burning out on a game, I think it also has to do with your expectations going into it. When you have been tempted by a 2/10 in a trophy guide and suddenly encounter a challenge like Flappy Goat, frustrations are just around the corner. On the other hand, I don't think anyone will start Super Meat Boy and expect it to be a walk in the park.

[starcrunch061]

Since when did hit boxes that extend beyond your character become such a break point? Anyone who's played games for more than 10 years should be used to it. 

 

In my day, hit boxes were the square in front of your character! 

 

[AJ_Radio]

11 hours ago, pinkrobot_pb said:

In Flappy Goat it is indeed because the hibox of your goat is bigger than just the sprite. Imagine a picture with that sprite on it and without any margins. It will still have space in the corners or along edges where there is image but not sprite. What I did was imagine the hitbox image while playing and not just look at the sprite. It did instantly become a lot easier and failing felt less random and annoying. It only took about 10 attempts for me on PS4. And that is hardly skill related, because I usually suck at these type of games because of old fingers and terrible reflexes. You should have seen me with Teslagrad, it was bad.

 

As far as burning out on a game, I think it also has to do with your expectations going into it. When you have been tempted by a 2/10 in a trophy guide and suddenly encounter a challenge like Flappy Goat, frustrations are just around the corner. On the other hand, I don't think anyone will start Super Meat Boy and expect it to be a walk in the park.

 

This goes back to what I said about Flappy Goat not being that difficult in my opinion.

 

Goat Simulator was rated 5 out of 10 because of Flappy Goat, the rest of the game is easy and shouldn't take more than a few hours with a handy trophy guide. I haven't played the DLC yet so I don't know how hard or easy that is.

 

Super Meat Boy is probably one of the most hardcore games out there. Doesn't mean it's the hardest game with a trophy list (I think Crypt of the Necrodancer takes that honor) or it's next to impossible.

 

Although, admittedly, I grew up on Mario and Sonic platformers so Super Meat Boy was a cinch. Still extremely difficult, I still die on my Girl Boy death run attempts.

 

11 hours ago, starcrunch061 said:

Since when did hit boxes that extend beyond your character become such a break point? Anyone who's played games for more than 10 years should be used to it. 

 

In my day, hit boxes were the square in front of your character! 

 

 

Video games are lot more fair now than they used to be.

 

If you had any experience with the NES era of video gaming then you definitely know there was a lot of games that had terrible hit detection, wonky hit boxes, awful controls and poorly executed mechanics. Plus you had to do it all on one continue with most games. Ghostbusters, Ninja Gaiden, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles and Back to the Future come to mind.

 

One reason why those old episodes of Angry Video Game Nerd are still entertaining.

[Spinosaurus Rex]

On 24.10.2018 at 9:32 AM, Spaz said:

So what do you guys think?

 

I decided to answer and bump this thread because you have an interesing point of view and you always seem passionate about anything you're writing about.

 

Almost everyone on this site has OCD with something. One cares about completion, one cares about trophy percentage rarity, one cares about having rarest platinums in his showcase etc. Comparing my profile with yours, they're drastically different, because you care mostly about completion (and you said you check games on alternative profile). Mostly, because you wouldn't put SMB on your profile if you wouldn't be 100% sure you can platinum it.

 

From my side, I don't care for completion, instead I'm looking now for rare platinums for showcase + rare trophies that can fill my "Rarest trophies" box. I'm ready to sacrifice my completion for games like Brick Breaker, which are bad and impossible to 100% only for that one 0.12% bronze trophy. I also go one day for Futuridium EP Deluxe and Sine Mora, which have 0.08 - 0.11% trophies (I don't know if I'll be able to get them, but again, I don't care if it'll take my completion down). I also like to check ranks of my games (to have at least C, as it means I discovered enough content of the game as average player).

 

While I was able to finally plat Super Meat Boy, which you can't push yourself to achieve, you got 100% in e.g. Bloodborne, Batman: Arkham Knight or Hotline Miami 2, which I really don't want to see again (of course they're very good games). Maybe I'd be able to complete them, but seriously, I'd prefer to do another SMB-like game than coming back to them because I lack this amount of patience you have. So who's the better trophy hunter - the one with one 0.18% plat or the one with three more common, but still time and patience demanding? I honestly think that the latter. While I was able to complete one game you've abandoned, you completed 20 other games I've abandoned.

 

There's a lot of different trophy hunters which have various colourful profiles. Take KaKrackle for example, his avg completion is 56.31%, his level is pretty low and he plays occasionally, but he completed several nigh-impossible games. Same goes for Floriiss, but he's extremely dedicated, having high avg completon, high level and going for many different genres of games. This guy also has pretty crazy trophy list. That's great there's so many different ways to look on trophy hunting.

 

So in conclusion: you hit your breaking point with SMB. I'm hitting breaking point constantly with half of my games, so there's no way to know if I abandoned them because I was lazy or because it was lack of skill. Although I may confess there's several games I wanted to complete and just couldn't push myself, like Flame Over or The Bit.Trip. But I chose to move on, to look for another experience. Maybe it's a waste of cash, buying a game and not completing it but hell, money spent on hobby is never wasted.

Edited February 10, 2019 by sashamence

[DansomeTV]

After years of going for 100% on all my games, I'm done. I want to play games without guides again. I've disabled trophy notifications on my system and moving forward will only play until a game is no longer fun. I have a very high completion profile with a lot of hard games and no blemishes, but it's got the point where playing games has become a chore and I'm too obsessed. This needs to be a stress relief, not a second job. Gaming now is a lot weirder than when I was a kid. I remember playing through Ocarina of Time without knowing anything about it. I don't think I've done that since the early Xbox 360 days and I'm tired.

[AJ_Radio]

On 2/8/2019 at 8:02 PM, sashamence said:

Almost everyone on this site has OCD with something. One cares about completion, one cares about trophy percentage rarity, one cares about having rarest platinums in his showcase etc. Comparing my profile with yours, they're drastically different, because you care mostly about completion (and you said you check games on alternative profile). Mostly, because you wouldn't put SMB on your profile if you wouldn't be 100% sure you can platinum it.

 

Completionist tells me you like to experience most of everything the game has to offer. That includes buying DLC and finishing whatever content is on it.

 

I usually play on an alt if it's a game I'm not sure about. I have gotten refunds from Amazon because I returned games that I ended up not liking at all. Usually by the time a game I buy ends up on my backlog and I list it on this website then it's a game I'm interesting in playing.... at some point.

 

I got too many games at this point to care about anything new that's coming out. Darksiders 3 and Days Gone are two games I'm looking forward to, along with some small indie titles, but apart from those nothing else interests me.

 

Going for trophy percentage rarity is work. But so is completion, depending on how you look at it.

 

On 2/8/2019 at 8:02 PM, sashamence said:

From my side, I don't care for completion, instead I'm looking now for rare platinums for showcase + rare trophies that can fill my "Rarest trophies" box. I'm ready to sacrifice my completion for games like Brick Breaker, which are bad and impossible to 100% only for that one 0.12% bronze trophy. I also go one day for Futuridium EP Deluxe and Sine Mora, which have 0.08 - 0.11% trophies (I don't know if I'll be able to get them, but again, I don't care if it'll take my completion down). I also like to check ranks of my games (to have at least C, as it means I discovered enough content of the game as average player).

 

I have no interest in those kinds of games.

Going for rare platinums to me is work, not a stress reliever. I have a few tougher games on my backlog, namely games like Dead Space 2, Vanquish and of course, Super Meat Boy. But I'm definitely not a guy that specifically goes for difficult platinums just to prove that I did it. I prefer to complete my games and most of them range from easy to medium in difficulty. Nothing too hard or strenuous. That's just my style of play.

 

On 2/8/2019 at 8:02 PM, sashamence said:

While I was able to finally plat Super Meat Boy, which you can't push yourself to achieve, you got 100% in e.g. Bloodborne, Batman: Arkham Knight or Hotline Miami 2, which I really don't want to see again (of course they're very good games). Maybe I'd be able to complete them, but seriously, I'd prefer to do another SMB-like game than coming back to them because I lack this amount of patience you have. So who's the better trophy hunter - the one with one 0.18% plat or the one with three more common, but still time and patience demanding? I honestly think that the latter. While I was able to complete one game you've abandoned, you completed 20 other games I've abandoned.

 

Bloodborne isn't that difficult, it's one of the best exclusives this generation and it's trophy rarity reflects that. Batman: Arkham Knight was a bit of a challenge, I struggled a lot on the Community Challenges when I was going for them two years ago. I loved the game because I'm a big Batman fan, it was a nice sendoff to a solid series developed by Rocksteady Games. Hotline Miami 2 is one of the better indie games, and one with a kick ass soundtrack. The game was designed around trial and error, so it didn't irritate me too much. It's a game I recommend to any indie game lover.

 

I never said I will abandon or give up on Super Meat Boy. Right now I'm slowly, gradually working towards my backlog. I have Girl Boy (Light Cotton Alley) mostly figured out so it should only take me a few hours of practice to nail it. Impossible Boy is a different story however.

 

Your collection of games reflects the kind of gamer you are. I play a variety of mostly easy to medium difficulty games, with a little sprinkling of some harder games.

 

Going by your logic, the better trophy hunter is one who strives to complete their games and go after games that are worthwhile. Not the guy stacking tons of Japanese visual novels and buying six stacks of Jack n' Jill DX while mashing that X button as quickly as possible. That isn't a gamer nor a real trophy hunter, that is whoring out trophies.

 

I know some people are going to hate me for saying that, but the only enjoyment out of those so called "games" is hearing that DING when you earn a trophy. The games themselves offer very little value, the term for them is shovelware.

 

Look at Orc Slayer. That game would barely get any game owners at all if it didn't have a trophy list.

 

On 2/8/2019 at 8:02 PM, sashamence said:

There's a lot of different trophy hunters which have various colourful profiles. Take KaKrackle for example, his avg completion is 56.31%, his level is pretty low and he plays occasionally, but he completed several nigh-impossible games. Same goes for Floriiss, but he's extremely dedicated, having high avg completon, high level and going for many different genres of games. This guy also has pretty crazy trophy list. That's great there's so many different ways to look on trophy hunting.

 

Those two guys are a minority in a minority in a minority.

 

If you want three more guys who play in the same style as them, greenzsaber, GrannyTranny and Danny_Johanson have also completed some nigh impossible games.

 

That's not me. You will never see me platinum Crypt of the Necrodancer, nor be the first guy to platinum Badlands after it was said for years on this website that it was impossible to obtain.

 

TheYuriG is another guy who has a high completion rate, has a very low trophy rarity percentage and plays every single day.

 

The point is, there will always be someone better than you. That's why I gave up any notion of competition a long time ago and just go for games I want to play and enjoy.

 

On 2/8/2019 at 8:02 PM, sashamence said:

So in conclusion: you hit your breaking point with SMB. I'm hitting breaking point constantly with half of my games, so there's no way to know if I abandoned them because I was lazy or because it was lack of skill. Although I may confess there's several games I wanted to complete and just couldn't push myself, like Flame Over or The Bit.Trip. But I chose to move on, to look for another experience. Maybe it's a waste of cash, buying a game and not completing it but hell, money spent on hobby is never wasted.

 

What truly matters is getting your enjoyment out of the games.

 

A majority of people just play through the story in a game like Marvel's Spider-Man and move on, never touching that game again. That's perfectly fine. That's just how we watch television shows and movies. When they're over, we move on and find other things to occupy ourselves with.

 

On 2/11/2019 at 1:09 AM, dansomekid said:

After years of going for 100% on all my games, I'm done. I want to play games without guides again. I've disabled trophy notifications on my system and moving forward will only play until a game is no longer fun. I have a very high completion profile with a lot of hard games and no blemishes, but it's got the point where playing games has become a chore and I'm too obsessed. This needs to be a stress relief, not a second job. Gaming now is a lot weirder than when I was a kid. I remember playing through Ocarina of Time without knowing anything about it. I don't think I've done that since the early Xbox 360 days and I'm tired.

 

I had this mentality with Runescape and World of Warcraft.

 

I would always try to find ways to level up my skills and go after achievements respectively. But it got to be too much of a chore and if you look at both games now, that's all anybody does anymore.

 

That's because back then people just played through a game and that was it. It was extremely rare for anybody to try to go for completion or any of that stuff that we're so obsessed with now.

 

I was the same way with Goldeneye 007. Played that game back in 1997 - 1998 without knowing anything about it. Turned out to be one of my all time favorite FPS and N64 exclusives, and I enjoyed it so much I went after Secret Agent and 007 difficulty.

 

If that game had achievements/trophies it wouldn't of been the same.