Games Like My Name is Mayo 2 Ruined The Value Of Platinums

[Rally-Vincent---]

Too bad nobody claims that repeated threads about games like My Name Is Mayo ruined the value of forum threads. The constant repetition of the ever same sentiment - make that a giant smiley, then people wouldn't even have to type it out anymore.

[Jelly Soup]

5 hours ago, Rally-Vincent--- said:

Too bad nobody claims that repeated threads about games like My Name Is Mayo ruined the value of forum threads. The constant repetition of the ever same sentiment - make that a giant smiley, then people wouldn't even have to type it out anymore.

 

When you're already circling the drain, it's hard to calculate the value. Blood from a stone, ya know?

[AJ_Radio]

People keep bringing up these threads because they are easy to make. 
 

Any real, concrete argument regarding these easy games died years ago.

 

I think a better argument to go on is pinpointing when Sony started allowing these trash games to get put on the store. 

 

I feel like the shift happened when Sony moved to California in early 2016, changing their name to Sony Interactive Entertainment. Before that, it was Sony Computer Entertainment, still based in Japan. Once they moved, we started getting crap like Albedo: Eyes From Outer Space and Orc Slayer, games done with minimal effort that were very easy platinums. Then My Name is Mayo came around. The shift was already in place. 
 

Afterwards it was just a snowball effect from there on out. You never would of gotten these piss easy games back in 2013 - 2014, at best they would be just 100 percent titles limited to one stack.

 

I think I read somewhere that the people who made Blacklight: Retribution couldn’t get a platinum for the game. It’s a difficult 100 percent with a lot of multiplayer grinding. 
 

There’s no question there was a shift. New people took over. Now Sony is denying a lot of indie games, instead they’re allowing complete garbage on the store. @Sergen pointed this out in detail on one of his status updates, which helps confirm the shift in regards to how trophies were made. 
 

You had a higher standard prior to the year 2016. After that, the trophy standards just got lower. Now, they’re an utter joke.

Edited August 14, 2021 by AJ_Radio

[Guest]

2 hours ago, AJ_Radio said:

I think I read somewhere that the people who made Blacklight: Retribution couldn’t get a platinum for the game. It’s a difficult 100 percent with a lot of multiplayer grinding

Blacklight: Retribution has a silver trophy for completing all trophies.

 

Mission Accomplished (Silver)

Earn all Other Trophies in Blacklight: Retribution.

This game was released in late 2013, so for a game to receive platinum trophy support was different.

 

The developers of Entwined (2014) also had a desire to reward their players with a platinum trophy.

 

Entwined (Gold)

Collect all the other trophies.

[AJ_Radio]

2 minutes ago, kevao97 said:

Blacklight: Retribution has a silver trophy for completing all trophies.

 

Mission Accomplished (Silver)

Earn all Other Trophies in Blacklight: Retribution.

This game was released in late 2013, so for a game to receive platinum trophy support was different.

 

The developers of Entwined (2014) also had a desire to reward their players with a platinum trophy.

 

Entwined (Gold)

Collect all the other trophies.

 

That's my whole point. Nowadays these games would get a platinum that would be significantly easier with far less grinding time needed to achieve them.

 

The standards are lower.

[Jelly Soup]

5 hours ago, AJ_Radio said:

I think I read somewhere that the people who made Blacklight: Retribution couldn’t get a platinum for the game. It’s a difficult 100 percent with a lot of multiplayer grinding.

 

The two reasons I could think of for this:
1. They weren't willing to pay the fee to add a platinum at time of publication. There is a fee attached to having one, as a sales hook considering the presence of a platinum has a tangible effect on sales.

2. They didn't think to add one at time of publication. The PSN normally doesn't allow for a platinum to be added after publication (there are exception to this, but you can count them on one hand).

[AJ_Radio]

On 8/13/2021 at 11:29 PM, Jelly Soup said:

 

The two reasons I could think of for this:
1. They weren't willing to pay the fee to add a platinum at time of publication. There is a fee attached to having one, as a sales hook considering the presence of a platinum has a tangible effect on sales.

2. They didn't think to add one at time of publication. The PSN normally doesn't allow for a platinum to be added after publication (there are exception to this, but you can count them on one hand).

 

Obviously the standards have drastically changed since then. A lot of old non-platinum titles have trophies for getting all the other trophies, so I can likely guess it was one of these two reasons.

[Jelly Soup]

14 minutes ago, AJ_Radio said:

 

Obviously the standards have drastically changed since then. A lot of old non-platinum titles have trophies for getting all the other trophies, so I can likely guess it was one of these two reasons.

 

You got me curious about that, so I tried to look it up. As far as I can tell, since Sony doesn't seem to keep policy archives, the rule about 'no platinum after publication' has always been there, but wasn't really enforced stringently until sometime around the PS4 launch. I'd imagine during the PS3 days it was loosely followed as a kind of PR move aimed at developers. During that same time frame, XBLA was charging pretty high prices for patches over a certain size to encourage devs to not upload broken crap to be fixed later with a version change. I can see someone thinking "lets have the same, but be visually more reasonable than the competition" as a way to widen the exclusives gap.

 

But, as is always the way with large corporations, the allure of free cash on the promise that your product will create more free cash is a big enough hook that it's now the standard. Wonder if that means game devs count as whales.

[kfree7]

On 8/13/2021 at 0:07 AM, Jelly Soup said:

 

Yes, actually. First two games were hilarious.

Haven’t played the 2nd one. 
 

Need to catch up. 

[Jelly Soup]

1 hour ago, kfree7 said:

Haven’t played the 2nd one. 
 

Need to catch up. 

 

It's pretty good value for the price point. There are vastly worse thing to spend a buck on.

Now, is it better than Mayo 1, that's the real question.

[AJ_Radio]

On 8/19/2021 at 7:54 PM, Jelly Soup said:

 

You got me curious about that, so I tried to look it up. As far as I can tell, since Sony doesn't seem to keep policy archives, the rule about 'no platinum after publication' has always been there, but wasn't really enforced stringently until sometime around the PS4 launch. I'd imagine during the PS3 days it was loosely followed as a kind of PR move aimed at developers. During that same time frame, XBLA was charging pretty high prices for patches over a certain size to encourage devs to not upload broken crap to be fixed later with a version change. I can see someone thinking "lets have the same, but be visually more reasonable than the competition" as a way to widen the exclusives gap.

 

But, as is always the way with large corporations, the allure of free cash on the promise that your product will create more free cash is a big enough hook that it's now the standard. Wonder if that means game devs count as whales.

 

I don't miss trophy lists having ridiculous grinds like Far Cry 2, Killzone 2 or Resistance 2. The trophy designers went too overboard with having either ridiculously difficult trophies or overly grindy trophies, or both.

 

It was Microsoft who introduced the achievement system, Sony wouldn't pick up their own achievement system until a few years later after the Xbox 360 hit the market. I always saw achievements as simply bonuses.

 

With giant corporations the allure of free cash is a win win. Just look what Shark Cards have done to GTA Online. Do you think Rockstar is going to bother with making Bully 2? Of course not. That game is long dead. Why would you spend so much money on hiring competent game designers and directors, go through the pain of brainstorming and planning out a game years in advance, when you can save so much agony with microtransactions/lootboxes?

 

Even Ubisoft has gone to great measures to advertise their products INGAME, while you're on the main menu of any particular game. I was always reminded to buy Assassin's Creed Valhalla every time I accessed the menu in Odyssey.

 

If that isn't corporatism and capitalism, I don't know what is.

Edited August 21, 2021 by AJ_Radio
Fixed some typos

[Jelly Soup]

You have to remember that no one knew how to make good achievements with this new system that some forward thinking programmers suddenly farted out on to the unsuspecting public. Most of the earliest ones were super grinding stuff or otherwise highly situational. It wouldn't be for around, what, two years before achievements became mandatory for all games going forward for both of the major gaming ecosystems. I don't know that Sony had one, but Microsoft had a guide up on the 360 dev site on how to develop better achievements. Most of the notes were "avoid online ones that can only ever be earned by one or two people, this just encourages people to cheat or otherwise screw with the network". Sony didn't seem to care much beyond the realization that these would eventually be considered a major selling point for a fifth of the potential playerbase.

 

I remember reading a article and blogs from devs in those days saying that a lot of achievement sets were either made 99% progression or just piles of annoying crap simply because they didnt' care. It was just one more thing to have to blow dev time and money on. The game changer was THQ doing a crap job on Avatar: The Burning Earth. In a bid to make the game break even, it's achievement list was completable in five minutes for max gamers score (for those who don't XBox, this would be analogous to a platinum) and even showed the easiest method to do it in the gameplay trailer. The game more than broke even and now every publisher on the planet knows it's an easy way to boost sales. I believe it was within the next year or so that Sony upped the achievement suggestion to a mandate that is mostly followed to this day (a couple exceptions do exist).

 

To bring this back around, I don't know that I have a major problem with grindy achievements. If I'm enjoying the game, I'm enjoying the game. Doesn't help me going back to the PS3 days where I played whatever, but these days I don't bother with games I'm not interested in, so this is less of a problem.

[AJ_Radio]

1 hour ago, Jelly Soup said:

You have to remember that no one knew how to make good achievements with this new system that some forward thinking programmers suddenly farted out on to the unsuspecting public. Most of the earliest ones were super grinding stuff or otherwise highly situational. It wouldn't be for around, what, two years before achievements became mandatory for all games going forward for both of the major gaming ecosystems. I don't know that Sony had one, but Microsoft had a guide up on the 360 dev site on how to develop better achievements. Most of the notes were "avoid online ones that can only ever be earned by one or two people, this just encourages people to cheat or otherwise screw with the network". Sony didn't seem to care much beyond the realization that these would eventually be considered a major selling point for a fifth of the potential playerbase.

 

I remember reading a article and blogs from devs in those days saying that a lot of achievement sets were either made 99% progression or just piles of annoying crap simply because they didnt' care. It was just one more thing to have to blow dev time and money on. The game changer was THQ doing a crap job on Avatar: The Burning Earth. In a bid to make the game break even, it's achievement list was completable in five minutes for max gamers score (for those who don't XBox, this would be analogous to a platinum) and even showed the easiest method to do it in the gameplay trailer. The game more than broke even and now every publisher on the planet knows it's an easy way to boost sales. I believe it was within the next year or so that Sony upped the achievement suggestion to a mandate that is mostly followed to this day (a couple exceptions do exist).

 

To bring this back around, I don't know that I have a major problem with grindy achievements. If I'm enjoying the game, I'm enjoying the game. Doesn't help me going back to the PS3 days where I played whatever, but these days I don't bother with games I'm not interested in, so this is less of a problem.

 

We're both in the same age group, so we can relate a lot to this stuff, but I don't entirely agree with what you're saying.

 

Games prior to 2008 didn't have trophy lists. Uncharted: Drakes Fortune was released in late 2007, before the achievements became mandatory. Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots, generally regarding as one of Hideo Kojima's best works, didn't have a trophy list for years. Trophy lists for these games weren't around until long after the games came out. That may be a reason why the original Uncharted doesn't have as many game owners as Uncharted 2 or Uncharted 3 on the PS3. It doesn't have multiplayer, so that may account for another reason.

 

Even Blizzard didn't notice either. Achievements were introduced with the Wrath of the Lich King expansion for World of Warcraft. I had a lot of fun playing that game back in the day. Even still, a good majority of players didn't care for achievements, as they played mostly to have fun and to engage in the awesome raids this game had.

 

We can agree too many trophy lists from the early days of achievement hunting were too grindy and difficult. But we have now reached a point where programmers are just handing us achievements on a dinner plate. Steam is especially notorious for this, their achievement system is a joke and I don't even bother going after any achievement whenever I play a game on Steam.

 

Brian of PS5Trophies, a guy I followed for several years now, has even jumped on the trend of cashing in on easy platinums. What is the point? We're all doing this for ourselves, because at the end of the day, nobody cares about your achievements except yourself.

[Fing3rButt3r3]

Still need to buy 3, when is it coming to sales?

[TheDarkKratos]

25 minutes ago, Fing3rButt3r3 said:

Still need to buy 3, when is it coming to sales?

It's cheap enough I guess. But my question is where's Mayo 4?

The game developer stated that Mayo 3 was the last in the series.

But Why not have My Name Is Mayo: More Mayo🤣

 

Spoiler