Talking Point: Should All PSN Games Include a Platinum Trophy?

I think it should be up to the developers. Some games shouldn't have a platinum, like Aab's Animals. It should be decided based on the game itself.

To me, all a platinum trophy says is that you've got all of the game's trophies. I don't see why it should be different for smaller games.

Great topic. I've been very disappointed with which games don't have a Platinum recently. I bought Lumines for my Vita at retail, and a couple of those trophies were really quite difficult, but no platinum. Something like PixelJunk Monsters HD absolutely deserves a platinum trophy, because there is a lot of content, lots of challenges, and one of the trophies is perfect clearing every stage. If you've ever played the game you should have no doubt that that is deserving of a platinum.

I absolutely do not want to dilute the value of a platinum trophy. I don't want for there to be no restrictions on the system and for games to give them out easily. I want them to be hard to get. For that reason I don't want every game to have a platinum. There are some games that no matter what you can't think of something hard enough to do that deserves a platinum.

BUT Sony needs to think about this a little bit more and be much clearer about what is deserving of a Platinum. Some are too easy to get, while some games (PixelJunk Monsters for example) have numerous and extremely difficult challenges with no platinum to show for it. It's not a matter of price, it's not a matter of challenge, so what is their arbitrary decision making based on? Hours of content? If that's what they are considering, then they are handicapping puzzle games and tower defense games, which are built around replayability, and can involve some of the most difficult challenges. Something like "amount of challenge involved" is difficult to quantify, but I'd like to see them try harder.

I couldn't give a rats ass either way to be quite frank. Sometimes I wish trophies would just go away and die. When it comes to games I just play them n if I dont get a platinum, so what Ive played the game. I know a few people who wont even play a game that deosn't have trophies as trophy hunting is more important to them than actually playing the game. Its quite pathetic really. If a developer decides not to add them or they can't, who cares!? Ill still play the game. I guess it'd be a shame for all the trophy whores tho, but aren't they supposed to be gamers first n foremost anyway? A game shouldn't be ignored on the basis that it has meaningless trophys or not.

For me personaly, i just play to complete a game that I liked a lot, doesn't matter if has or not platinum, it's retail or download, easy or hard, i have to really appreciate when i am playing to pass "the barrier" from normal play to achievement play.

Good article. It was Lumines on Vita that got my goat. I think those kind of games, where it's not about a story or multiplayer, really benefit from having trophies and I was specifically looking forward to earning lots of them on it. To find that a full price game came with a small trophy list and no platinum was quite annoying. But apparently it's down to devs to sort it out and I guess some don't want to do it. But's what's more annoying is a game like Sound Shapes, a game I don't particularly like, which has a minimal list but they're all gold with a platinum. Those kind of inconsistencies shouldn't be happening.

I agree that Sound Shapes was an inconsistency. I don't feel like I earned that platinum as much as others and none of the trophies had anything to do with the real gameplay. But all in all I think the problem more often is NOT including enough trophies in a game. Lumines is a great example. And not getting a platinum for PJ Monsters is just wrong.

Plat should be hard to get. Beating a small game is way easier than beating a huge game, duh, ... so I voted to distinguish between the two

I always thought that they need to add some new metal for small games. Something better than gold but worse than platinum. Gold is too cheap for that matter.

There are some small games that are really hard to 100% complete. Contra Hardcorps Uprising, for example. So it is just fare to create special prize for beating 100% out of small games.

Or hell, those 100% platinum-less PSN titles (or even retail ones) should have something like a platinum ribbon, instead of a platinum trophy.

100% is how you define it. Even "small" games can typically think of something devilishly hard that could be deserving of a platinum. Puzzle games and platformers and tower defense can require time constraints or perfect runs. But it would be a time consuming task for Sony to decide what is deserving of platinum in terms of challenge though, so I'm assuming they have some arbitrary rule that leads to some deserving games being left out and vise versa.

Here's a random, creative solution: You know how 3rd party websites have all those stats like which of your trophies are the most rare? What if Sony used this database to dynamically change the value or types of trophies based on rarity, or the percentage of people that own a game that earned the trophy.

Yes, I think platinum consistency would be nice. Especially since 100% of trophies on non-platinum games not only feels less satisfying, but also lacks permanence. For example, after getting 100% in the excellent Scott Pilgrim, not only did I not get a trophy, but the "feat" of 100% was erased by subsequent DLC knocking me back to a lower percentage. Sure I might find the time to add it to my backlog, but in the meantime it's annoying to have that "work" just disappear with no record. Platinums fix this completely. A platinum is for the initial trophy set and the percentage can be a sort of long-term game. "Try to stay at 100%." As it stands it's hardly worth it to get the tougher trophies in platinum-less games. I see this as a flaw.

I think they should be determined by their challenge and difficulty. Treat them like true, rare rewards for those who excel in a skill, or just practice and grind until they earn it. I have none, I play for fun, the story, and the experience. Trophies aren't a big deal to me, but they are to some... so make it worth it.
... and why not make them worth points or credits toward add-ons and dlc. That would give them real purpose.

actually i think the most important thing for sony to change now is to give the option to remove those games that u want to try but dun end up playing...i have tons of games with 0 percent and 1-2 percent

@Squiggle55 Sound Shapes' Death Mode would like a word with you.

@JavierYHL My cousin shares that view. He won't even start a game he doesn't like the look of 100% (from PS+ or borrowed off someone) as if he doesn't like the game he doesn't want the 0% on his screen. Every time he says that I just wanna smack him, haha.

To be honest I'm not bothered that most download games don't have the Platinum. I only personally Platinum a game I've really enjoyed and use it as a way of saying "I bloody loved Borderlands 2!" The only download game I've wished had a Platinum was Tokyo Jungle as I enjoyed that game immensely, but it still says 100% next to it.

What I can't stand is these people who buy kids games just for the trophy as you're not earning it for you love of gaming, you're doing it to have one more than someone else. There's a guy on my friends lost who has 340 Platinums. That, frankly, is sad.

Death mode =)....Randomness is always pain in the oss. Remember treasures in Uncharted: Golden Abyss.

Hell no. The trophy system is already unbalanced enough as it is. For instance: it makes no sense that I can get a plat on The Walking Dead simply by playing through the game while on MK9 I need to pratically abstain from living if I want to get it. It would be nice to have a different trinket for non-plat games, though, since, as someone said above, 100% just seems less satisfying.

EDIT: Oh, and don't even get me started on online trophies that make games with online modes impossible to plat once the online community dries out. They should be on a whole different list or inexistent.

journey would have took about 6 hours to platinum if it had one.....

reminds me of the Avatar game when the 360 first came out.....1k gamerscore could be acthieved on that game in 3 minutes.....all you had to do was perform a combo of 50 and wallah 100% game achievements.

They need to have a multiplayer platinum for those trophies instead.....i hate have to do stupid gimmick moves in multiplayer just to hit a trophy......

@fchinaski True. Dead Or Alive 5 is as empty as Wayne Rooney's head.

Online ones are just stupid, I need Poker-Ace to finish Red Dead 100% but its just stupid as you have to hope six people are wanting to at poker and then wait half an hour til blinds are at maximum and then hope you win. I know nothing about poker so there's literally no chance of doing it. Things like that aren't a measure of your gaming prowess it's sheer luck.

I think it would diminish the gravity behind gaining a platinum trophy. Granted there are many PSN games that warrant it but many of them are... Somewhat easier to max out, people would be stocking up platinums left right and center. There should be a Uranium trophy, rewarded when you gather 100 Platinums.

I can see the issue with games being easier than others to get platinum trophies but the last time I checked a platinum trophy means you just completed all the other trophies in a game (100%) and I think all games should have platinum trophies. If you want to make trophies more of a skill than there needs to be a restructuring of the trophy system.