I Think It’s Time We Rethink What “100% Completionist” Actually Means in Gaming
I want to start a serious debate among completionists:
Do we need a new standard for what it means to “complete” a video game?
I started my completionist journey toward the end of the PS4 Pro era. I began hunting Platinum trophies in games like Ghost of Tsushima, God of War, and Horizon Zero Dawn, and eventually moved on to games like Red Dead Redemption 2 and Devil May Cry 5 — a Platinum that was genuinely difficult and extremely time-consuming.
I wasn't afraid of difficult games. I wasn't afraid of grinding.
I actually loved the feeling of mastering a game and earning that Platinum legitimately.
Over the years, though, I accumulated a massive backlog. Some games I didn't even enjoy anymore. Some had online trophies attached to dead or nearly dead multiplayer modes. Some required grinding that felt completely disconnected from the actual game.
Eventually, my trophy account became a mess.
So I made a separate Region 3 account specifically for trophy hunting. The games shown in the screenshots are some of the Platinums I've earned over the years.
And that's where my problem really begins.
When Does “Completion” Become “Obligation”?
Let's take Yakuza: Like a Dragon.
I absolutely enjoyed the game itself.
But the ridiculous grind for the best weapons, maxing out characters, and preparing for the final dungeon challenge was another story.
At the time, many guides essentially told you that you needed heavily maxed characters and weapons to deal with the final challenge. I ended up spending roughly seven straight days grinding.
Seven days.
Not mastering combat.
Not discovering new content.
Not completing meaningful quests.
Just grinding.
And then there are things like Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War, where Dead Ops Arcade becomes part of the completionist equation.
There comes a point where I'm no longer asking:
>
I'm asking:
>
Those are two very different questions.
And Then There's Online Trophies
This is another problem I think completionists need to seriously reconsider.
Online trophies can become impossible or ridiculously inconvenient years after a game releases.
Servers die.
Player populations disappear.
Ping becomes terrible depending on your region.
Developers shut things down.
And sometimes you simply need PS Plus or another subscription to access the functionality required for a trophy.
I've also gone through multiple consoles — two PS4 Pros, then a PS5, and eventually a PS5 Pro.
Without the right cloud/online-save setup, you can end up losing progression and being forced to repeat huge portions of a game.
I don't want to spend my limited free time repeating the same grind because hardware changed or an online requirement became inconvenient.
That shouldn't determine whether I'm a “real” completionist.
This Is Why I Eventually Moved to PC
PC gaming gave me something I didn't really have on console:
Freedom.
If I've already:
- Completed every major quest
- Completed every side quest
- Defeated every boss
- Experienced the story
- Collected the important equipment
- Completed the meaningful challenges
- Played through the game on Hard difficulty
- Explored the world
- Earned every achievement that represents actual gameplay mastery
…and the only thing standing between me and “100%” is a ridiculous 10-hour material grind or an absurd minigame high score...
Why should using a trainer or Cheat Engine suddenly invalidate everything I've accomplished?
I'm not saying I want to cheat my way through an entire game.
Quite the opposite.
I want to play and complete the actual game.
If I use a tool to remove an unnecessary grind after I've already experienced the content, why does that make me less of a completionist?
Someone might say:
>
Great.
You should be proud of that.
But that doesn't mean everyone else has to spend 20 hours doing the same thing to qualify as a completionist.
Completionism should be about what you accomplished in the game, not how effectively the game managed to waste your time.
I'm Experiencing This Right Now With FFVII Rebirth
I'm currently working toward completing Final Fantasy VII Rebirth, and honestly, this is a perfect example of where I think the current completionist standard breaks down.
I'm completely happy to:
- Complete the story
- Complete the side quests
- Explore the world
- Defeat the bosses
- Play Hard Mode
- Complete Chadley's brutal combat challenges
- Earn powerful equipment
- Master the combat system
- Hunt down meaningful collectibles
That's fun.
That's what I consider completion.
But then we get into certain minigames.
Queen's Blood.
3D Brawler.
G-Bike.
Fort Condor.
Dolphin shows.
Chocobo-related challenges.
High-score challenges.
And all sorts of other activities that can require hours of repetition, memorization, or extremely specific performance.
Here's my controversial opinion:
If I wanted to spend hours mastering a card game, I'd buy a card game.
If I wanted to play a 3D boxing/brawler minigame, I'd play a game specifically designed around that.
If I wanted to play Mahjong, karaoke, dancing, rhythm games, arcade games, etc., I'd buy games built around those mechanics.
I don't have a problem with these things existing in FFVII Rebirth.
They're great optional content.
But I don't think they should be mandatory to call yourself a completionist.
The same applies to the Yakuza series.
I love Yakuza.
But if someone completes the entire main game, every major side story, every boss, every meaningful collectible and every combat challenge, I don't think their completion should suddenly become “invalid” because they didn't spend hours playing Mahjong, karaoke, batting cages, or some obscure minigame.
And This Is Especially Important As We Get Older
I'm in my thirties now.
I have a daughter.
I have a family.
I have responsibilities.
Gaming time is limited.
When I was younger, I could spend an entire weekend grinding one stupid weapon or repeating the same minigame 500 times.
I don't have that luxury anymore.
That doesn't mean I love games less.
It means my time has become more valuable.
And I don't think completionism should punish people simply because they have less free time.
So Here's My Proposed New Completionist Standard
Instead of having one giant binary definition of:
“100% = You did absolutely everything the developer put on the checklist.”
I think we should have different levels of completion.
🟢 Core Completion — 100%
- Main story
- All meaningful side quests
- Major optional bosses
- Major world exploration
- Important collectibles
- Major gameplay systems
- Meaningful character progression
- Major difficulty challenges
🔵 Mastery Completion
Everything above plus:
- Hard/Very Hard difficulty
- Combat challenges
- Advanced bosses
- Endgame challenges
- Skill-based content
🟡 Full Content Completion
Everything above plus:
- Minigames
- Collectible cleanup
- Optional activities
- High-score challenges
🔴 Absolute Completion / Developer Checklist
Literally everything:
- Every minigame
- Every high score
- Every obscure collectible
- Every grind
- Every online trophy
- Every multiplayer requirement
- Every ridiculous RNG requirement
Let people choose which level they want to pursue.
And most importantly:
Online trophies should NEVER be mandatory for “completion.”
If a trophy requires another human being, a live server, a subscription, or a functioning online population, it should be categorized separately.
And Yes, I Think Trainers Should Be Part of This Conversation
This is probably where people will disagree with me the most.
But I think we need to separate cheating the game from removing artificial time sinks.
If someone uses Cheat Engine to give themselves infinite HP and kills every boss without playing the game, obviously that's not meaningful completion.
But if someone has:
Completed the entire game → completed all meaningful content → beaten bosses legitimately → played Hard Mode → and then uses a trainer to skip a 15-hour material grind or an obnoxious minigame...
Why should I care?
The achievement is supposed to represent my relationship with the game, not my ability to tolerate repetitive tasks.
If you enjoy doing the grind legitimately:
Awesome.
If someone else doesn't:
That's okay too.
Neither person needs to be considered a “fake” completionist.
Completionism Should Measure Accomplishment — Not Suffering
This is the biggest point I want to make.
Some completionists seem to treat suffering as proof of legitimacy.
>
Why?
Did you understand the game better?
Did you master the combat?
Did you discover something nobody else discovered?
Did you experience more of the story?
Or did you simply spend more hours repeating an activity?
Time investment ≠ achievement.
Difficulty ≠ repetition.
And suffering ≠ completion.
We Need to Stop Gatekeeping Completionism
If someone wants to earn every trophy completely legitimately, including every minigame, every online trophy, every RNG drop and every 50-hour grind:
Respect.
That's an impressive achievement.
But if another player completes every meaningful part of the game and skips the artificial grind:
They shouldn't be told they're not a completionist.
Gaming has changed.
Our lives have changed.
The way we play games has changed.
And I think our definition of completion should change with it.
My proposed philosophy is simple:
Complete the game.
Master what matters.
Experience the content.
Skip the meaningless suffering if you want to.
And if a trophy or achievement requires an abandoned server, a subscription, a dead multiplayer community, or a 20-hour repetitive grind that adds nothing meaningful to the experience...
Maybe the problem isn't the player.
Maybe the completionist standard is outdated.
So I'm throwing this out to the completionist community:
What should actually count as “100% completion” in modern gaming?
And more importantly: