By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Trophies Reflect Skill More than Achievements

Kyros said:
wow trophies must be the most useless feature I have ever seen. Sony should have used their time to add some useful features. (Fullscreen modus for BluRay discs on 16:9 TVs, improved digital movie support, NTFS support for external hard-discs ...)

 

Judging by all the people who are in love with achievements, I would have to disagree.

I would say that the news feed is the most useless feature as I haven't used it since it first came out.



Around the Network
soulsamurai said:

A good example of OP is me a my friend Connoisseur. We are always in competition with each other and he is usually only 20 percent behind me. However when i go to look at his trophies and see what he has won....he has a billion games with a usual trophy completion of 7% and no platinums while I have a few games with 70 - 100 percent completion (excluding Pixel Junk Eden 26%, Pain 6%, and Warhawk 37%) I have 3 platinums and around 16 gold. ( I havn't updated my Sig in a while, i got the platinum for a replay of bioshock)

EDIT:

Me: B 239, S 33, G 16, P 3

Connoisseur: B 239, S 36, G 6

hmmm we tied on Bronze, but still if you only have 7 percent usually, then imagine how many games he has plunked down on there.

I'm going to use your example as a reason why the OP failed to make any point. Nothing you said described to me that you were any more skilled than your friend. What I learned is you two have different playing habits. You decide to run over games meticulously and possibly multiple times while he probably plays once and moves on. There is no more or less skill in either of those scenarios.

 



Tag: Became a freaking mod and a complete douche, coincidentally, at the same time.



They're fun and all, but neither one reflects skill very much. At least not at a glance. If somebody maxes out Buzz! or Avatar, they'll end up with a platinum trophy or 1000/1000. If somebody stomps PixelJunk Monsters, no platinum trophy for them. And Ikaruga on XBLA will net you a mere 200 gamerscore.

This article is pretty worthless.



What matters is what particular achievements you have, not how many. A high gamer score doesn't matter to me. It just means you have too much free time to play videogames. You can always look up what exact achievements your friends have and compare. It's not like all you see is a total.







VGChartz♥♥♥♥♥FOREVER

Xbone... the new "N" word   Apparently I troll MS now | Evidence | Evidence
Onyxmeth said:
soulsamurai said:

A good example of OP is me a my friend Connoisseur. We are always in competition with each other and he is usually only 20 percent behind me. However when i go to look at his trophies and see what he has won....he has a billion games with a usual trophy completion of 7% and no platinums while I have a few games with 70 - 100 percent completion (excluding Pixel Junk Eden 26%, Pain 6%, and Warhawk 37%) I have 3 platinums and around 16 gold. ( I havn't updated my Sig in a while, i got the platinum for a replay of bioshock)

EDIT:

Me: B 239, S 33, G 16, P 3

Connoisseur: B 239, S 36, G 6

hmmm we tied on Bronze, but still if you only have 7 percent usually, then imagine how many games he has plunked down on there.

I'm going to use your example as a reason why the OP failed to make any point. Nothing you said described to me that you were any more skilled than your friend. What I learned is you two have different playing habits. You decide to run over games meticulously and possibly multiple times while he probably plays once and moves on. There is no more or less skill in either of those scenarios.

 

 

That's very true, i never really did think about it that way. To keep my e-penis up though i will say we play online often and i usually edge him out with 1/3 more points lol but still doesn't reflect trophies.



CURRENTLY PLAYING:  Warframe, Witcher 2