DLC % logic?

[Guest]

1 hour ago, diskdocx said:

I would say PSN does the absolute correct calculation. If you have purchased a game, and that game has DLC trophies added, everyone has access to the DLC (even if they choose not to buy it).

 

Yes, that leads to lots of UR or VR trophies amongst DLC packs, but that's the reality. 100,000 people own a game, only 1000 have earned a particular DLC trophy, so the rarity is 1%. Trying to guess the number of people who own a particular DLC pack based on the number of people with 1 trophy from the DLC, compared to some formula based on the number of base game owners is....well....completely arbitrary.

 

It is a method used to prevent artificial inflation of rarity by arbitrarily deflating the rarity.

 

While there is no perfect solution, the DLC should be calculated based on base game owners.

 

I can't have a trophy removed from my profile because I don't want to do the MP. Same should apply for DLC. If you don't want to play it, fine, but those that do play it shouldn't have the rarities manipulated to prevent rare DLC trophies

I understood your point but it is interesting to think that if Sony wanted to, it would have the means to make this data more objective. see the ps5 example, which can predict how many hours you spent with the app open AND how many hours you actually played, are interesting data, and coupling statistics from dlcs owners would not be difficult for Sony. I understood the essence of what you said - dlcs are in fact part of the package, of the game - but this applied here on the website would only serve to artificial inflation of URs, we all know that truly these data would not be enlightening in relation to the difficulty and rarity real game, let's be honest and admit it. Don't you think that looking at a dlc with the correct number of owners would be much better to assess the difficulty of the trophies? Basically there would be no common trophies if the PSN method were used here, that would be bizarre and funny, literally all dlcs below 50% lol. I for example played Shadow of Mordor GOTY and the dlcs are obviously included, but I didn’t touch any, many did so and we all know that literally all owners of this version have the dlcs. the main problem is not even the question of rarity although the site is about trophies. I am referring to the incorrect information itself, I would like the data presented to be as accurate as possible.

[diskdocx]

39 minutes ago, kevao97 said:

I understood your point but it is interesting to think that if Sony wanted to, it would have the means to make this data more objective. see the ps5 example, which can predict how many hours you spent with the app open AND how many hours you actually played, are interesting data, and coupling statistics from dlcs owners would not be difficult for Sony. I understood the essence of what you said - dlcs are in fact part of the package, of the game - but this applied here on the website would only serve to artificial inflation of URs, we all know that truly these data would not be enlightening in relation to the difficulty and rarity real game, let's be honest and admit it. Don't you think that looking at a dlc with the correct number of owners would be much better to assess the difficulty of the trophies? Basically there would be no common trophies if the PSN method were used here, that would be bizarre and funny, literally all dlcs below 50% lol. I for example played Shadow of Mordor GOTY and the dlcs are obviously included, but I didn’t touch any, many did so and we all know that literally all owners of this version have the dlcs. the main problem is not even the question of rarity although the site is about trophies. I am referring to the incorrect information itself, I would like the data presented to be as accurate as possible.

Fair points, and for some games that might work. Games that have discreet DLC that is completely separate from the main game. But there are lots of games where that is not the case, so I'm not sure how you would accurately assess how many people have played that DLC content?

 

Ultimately there is no way to really gauge for some games other than to treat the DLC trophies the same way you treat any other game, unless you have a solid mechanism to more accurate determine DLC owners across the board for all games.

 

Just to further make a point, as I've been going back and cleaning up old PS3 games, most recently playing Tomb Raider Underworld. The most common trophy there is for completing the Prologue. It is not possible to earn any other trophy prior to completing the Prologue, and I don't believe you can possibly complete anything else during the Prologue.

 

And yet, only 88% of players have earned that trophy on PSNP, and only 82% on PSN. With 166k players tracked here, that means some 19,000 people have fired up this game, earned zero trophies, and not bothered finishing the Prologue. I'm not sure how that is possible, but using the DLC tracking scenario, the Prologue trophy should be at 100% rarity, and everyone who hasn't even touched the game should not be tracked.

[TimeLordCrow13y]

Personally I’m of the opinion that as long as PSNP is going to include DLC in calculating one’s completion percentage (and that does, regardless of my mixed feelings about DLC, make the most sense), the DLC rarity should be based on the number of base game owners. 

 

If that means a lot of easy DLC trophies wind up as UR, oh well. Based on the current percentage system, it’s the only thing that makes sense, IMO. 

 

We’re probably going to wind up with some UR trophies/Platinums that do not reflect difficulty at some point in the future anyway, due to the Plat no longer being obtainable (Mad Max, etc).  

[Guest]

1 hour ago, diskdocx said:

Fair points, and for some games that might work. Games that have discreet DLC that is completely separate from the main game. But there are lots of games where that is not the case, so I'm not sure how you would accurately assess how many people have played that DLC content?

 

Ultimately there is no way to really gauge for some games other than to treat the DLC trophies the same way you treat any other game, unless you have a solid mechanism to more accurate determine DLC owners across the board for all games.

 

Just to further make a point, as I've been going back and cleaning up old PS3 games, most recently playing Tomb Raider Underworld. The most common trophy there is for completing the Prologue. It is not possible to earn any other trophy prior to completing the Prologue, and I don't believe you can possibly complete anything else during the Prologue.

 

And yet, only 88% of players have earned that trophy on PSNP, and only 82% on PSN. With 166k players tracked here, that means some 19,000 people have fired up this game, earned zero trophies, and not bothered finishing the Prologue. I'm not sure how that is possible, but using the DLC tracking scenario, the Prologue trophy should be at 100% rarity, and everyone who hasn't even touched the game should not be tracked.

I'm thinking about something like per-user purchase statistics, but that might not work either, I don't know. This mental exercise is very interesting, but in the end we need to rely on data that may be potentially inaccurate, so it is complex. User purchases X> user is part of the statistics of owners of that particular dlc, without having to start or play the dlc to be part of the statistic. It would be fair, imo. Psnp collects the statistics for here based on registered members (as already happens, but this time with data closer to reality). The example you mentioned of TR is one of several, there is also the example of Sly Cooper where there is a trophy to just start the game, and apparently a lot of people do not have this trophy both on PSN itself and here, which makes things bizarre to understand (how does someone have a game registered without entering it at least ONE time?) anyway...

[Silocia]

10 hours ago, BGriff1986 said:

But it means you can effectively ‘buy’ your way to a whole bunch of ultra rare trophies, which somewhat devalues (although the value of trophies is a whole other discussion…)

 

 

This is very true that the value of trophies is a whole other discussion, however, what difference does it make that I for example ended up "buying" some ultra rare trophies simply because I wanted the 100% compared to the people who are literally buying platinums?

[Xylobe]

5 hours ago, DrBloodmoney said:

Difficulty =/= Rarity ,no matter how much y'all want it to.

 

This, this, and this. Only 3 of my 9 UR plats I would describe as having any mechanical difficulty at all; the other 6 were either longer games or were niche PS+ games that most people dropped.

 

This site takes DLC trophies into account for completion statistics. PSN itself takes DLC trophies into account for completion statistics. Whether or not you own the DLC could not matter less in either case. If you own the game and don't have the trophies, then you own the game and don't have the trophies. If you're concerned about trophies that are "too easy" being shown as "too rare," it doesn't mean the solution is to pull numbers out of a hat-- it means you don't understand what rarity is.

 

11 hours ago, BGriff1986 said:

But it means you can effectively ‘buy’ your way to a whole bunch of ultra rare trophies, which somewhat devalues (although the value of trophies is a whole other discussion…)

 

It's been said before that trophy/achievement hunting as a whole is more about free time and disposable income than gameplay ability, and that becomes more and more true the further up the leaderboard you look. You can already go out and buy more platinums than you can shake a stick at-- why is the sanctity of the Ultra Rare something that needs to be artificially protected?

[TimeLordCrow13y]

55 minutes ago, Silocia said:

This is very true that the value of trophies is a whole other discussion, however, what difference does it make that I for example ended up "buying" some ultra rare trophies simply because I wanted the 100% compared to the people who are literally buying platinums?

 

This. The rarities being accurately UR for many DLC trophies wouldn’t affect “leaderboard integrity” at all. Might make some people who think URs should be reserved for only a certain type of game mad, but it wouldn’t affect anything else.

 

Meanwhile the current leaderboard is basically useless with: A: so many people buying cheap shovelware 30 min or less Platniums and B: Many of the profiles of the site not updating unless manually updated (which if you do to too many profiles can cause you to be unable to sync your own (for non-Premium users), so why would most chance it)?

 

I literally just ran across a profile yesterday that was showing their last game played before 2020 (I think it was showing 2017) and when I manually updated, they had several trophies earned in 2021. 

 

I think rarity of DLC trophies actually being accurate would annoy a lot less people than the other two things I mentioned. 

 

Of course, I could be entirely wrong. 

Edited May 18, 2021 by TimeLordCrow13y

[Elegy]

This is a pretty old debate in the trophy community,  I know I've had the argument many times on forums and discord.  Personally, I don't think it makes sense to discount base game owners when calculating rarity of DLC but when you visit the profiles of people who have said base game and don't "own" the DLC they are still receiving a penalty to their completion for not doing the DLC.  Choosing to leave out people for one statistic but not another doesn't make sense to me.  Most of the debate is that "it is dumb that all DLC are UR trophies and completionists don't deserve to have a lot of easy UR trophies".  So... the people who are paying extra money and going out of their way to put in the time and effort get penalized with devalued trophy rarity that isn't in accordance with Sony's own metrics which seems odd to me. 

 

If people don't want DLC trophies to be rare because they are easy.. well start buying the DLC and putting in the time to earn those "freebie" trophies; the rarity will naturally decrease.  In my experience, a good percentage of DLC trophies are harder and more time consuming than the base game trophies.  Ninja Gaiden 3, Ghost of Tsushima, Batman Arkham City, Need For Speed 2015, every Uncharted game with DLC, DOOM, Nioh, RAGE and RAGE 2, Final Fantasy XV, Destiny 2, Dante's Inferno... and these are just off the top of my head.  The trophies are often UR because no one wants to take the time playing through games 2 or 3 more times, doing harder difficulties or mastering game mechanics.  Price of DLC could be a deterrent for some but even when the DLC is free or packed in with the game people still don't bother to do it unless its trivial like Astro's Playroom DLC so I don't really buy that argument anymore.

As others have said the rarity doesn't equate to the difficulty of the trophies, there is only a correlation.

Edited May 18, 2021 by Elegy

[SeniorRicketts]

I think yourgamercards net had a system where it somehow registered dlc trophies percentage only if you started the dlc 

So most dlc trophies were ultra rare unrelated to difficulty

I liked that 

[roosta_141]

Have to agree with what a lot of people have said here. 
If DLC trophies are going to be included as part of completion statistics, then their rarity should be based on the number of game owners too. 
It seems the fairest way. 

[PatinumNumemon]

I would rather see the DLC trophies be calculated through all game owners. I mean, it is kinda unfair to people who are paying the extra money to play the DLC and earn the trophies. If people get upset that they can not pay the DLC, then that's tough! Gaming has changed from what is was 15 years ago. It is all about putting in as much time and money into a single game as possible (not all games are like this today but you get what I mean). Sure, that means the DLC trophies will be ultra rare, but rarity does not equal difficulty. Look at Far Cry 2. All that is keeping people from wanting to get the platinum is some horribly unstable servers and a 40 to 80 hour grind. Not hard stuff at all really, just something that takes time. There is nothing wrong with casually trophy hunting, but you can't have one of the best looking profiles on PSNProfiles by just getting the platinum to these games (multiple Ratalaika games stacked on your profile does not make your profile the best either lol). It is something you gotta work for! Respect is not given, it is earned.

 

Personally, the rarity of the trophy does not affect me. At the end of the day, when I have all DLC finished, I will have the S rank, not you ?

[EdinhoN]

I think the current system is ok, percentages for DLC are usually reasonable enough and you can gauge from them whether to expect a DLC trophy to be grindy or hard.

Of course better smoothing models could be developed but it would be simply much work that nobody actually cares and people would always complain.

 

If DLC percentages are calculated from all base game owners, every DLC is a pit of rare and UR trophies.

If DLC percentages are calculated from people who got at least one trophy on that DLC, stuff like Grounded on TLOU is a 100% common trophy (that's why I think it's the worst possible system).

 

Current system is ok and usually only fails with title update trophies like New Game+, in those cases it would be nice to have a manual markup of such DLC lists as free content (if you check websites like TT and TA, they mark DLC either as "add-on" or "title update"). So basically, set all default values to "add-on" for all DLC lists and mods can mark free content with "title update".

If the list is "add-on", calculate with geometric mean, else calculate it based on total game owners.

Of course people will say it's too much work, but over the years almost all games are now correctly marked with region tags and game series.

 

[TurtlePM]

DLC Rarity should be calculated by the total number of player that already started the game, either only the base game or a complete edition - period. If the profile % rate includes DLC I didn't start, why the hell the DLC percentage has a different rate or is calculated differently?

 

Don't say "ahh, not all people pay for the DLC", when it's something that is available for everyone and people choose not to pay/start the DLC. People who avoid buying DLC are actually punished in their main % because psnp assumes players own all DLC.

 

Gems of War has a list that is accessible to everyone from the start, without paying anything. All the Rarity on that list is just shit because it only counts a small % of total owners + the few people that got the only trophy the list has.

Not to mention a trophy from the base game "Reach Level 100" has 11% and a DLC trophy "Reach Level 250" is over 25%. That's a great logic

Edited May 18, 2021 by TurtlePM

[AJ_Radio]

8 hours ago, Arcesius said:

Yeah that's exactly what happened, I tried to make a philosophy ?

 

I'm a mathematician, so naturally I'm interested in these things. I cannot comprehend why the amount of DLC owners is computed the way it is, and so far no one has been able to point me to any supportive evidence suggesting that it is being done correctly. 

 

You think it's fine the way it is? Alright, make your points as to why and we'll discuss. 'It's better than it was in 2016' is not an argument I accept, which has basically been your only point thus far.

I don’t need to delve any further into this. But since I enjoy reading your posts I’ll make a modicum of effort.

 

Before the change the DLC owners only accounted for those who did the trophies. 
 

A number of trophies in Batman: Arkham Knight are single player DLCs with only one trophy per DLC. All of them were at 100 percent rarity. Which meant if 10,000 people/owners had the Harley Quinn or Red Hood DLC, a 100 percent rarity meant that everyone of those 10,000 earned that silver trophy. 
 

Even the Uncharted DLCs that include Brutal difficulty had abnormally high trophy percentages. Under the old calculations this website only counted people who earned at least one trophy in a DLC pack. So even the speedrun trophies and the trophies for beating the Uncharted games as Doughnut Drake were high trophy rarity. 
 

Then sometime in 2017 there was a change in the calculations of DLC rarity. The current formula includes all game owners, not just people who did at least one trophy in a DLC pack. Most people do not buy or play DLC, which is a good reason why a lot of DLC trophies have considerably lower trophy rarity than trophies in the base game. 

 

PSNTrophyLeaders has even more skewed trophy statistics, so I think PSNP has the best system in place right now. 
 

Statistics on PSN may be more accurate, true. But because most of every game has ultra rare trophies due to trophy hunters being a small minority, I don’t even bother looking at those statistics because they don’t measure the true value of games in terms of rarity. How difficult the game is. How long it is. So on and so forth.

 

@DrBloodmoney already posted both formulas that PSNP has used. So do we take a bit of both formulas? Or do we make an entirely new formula made from scratch?
 

8 hours ago, Arcesius said:

Also.. how the fuck is discussing something as central to the purpose of this very site as having proper statistics 'making the forums soft'? 

I just threw that in here because debates like this usually end in arguments anyway. 
 

DLC trophy rarity. Exploiting glitches in games like Hollow Knight, which you have posted against several times. EZPZ games. The Last of Us Part II. Cyberpunk 2077. The list goes on and on and on. 
 

Someone might think a place like PSNP where we share a hobby, we wouldn’t be complaining as much. Sometimes that is just not the case. 
 

We’re soft. But that’s the world we live in now. Not enough real compassion. We fight over discussions like this, and nothing goes anywhere.

[kikataa]

The purpose of my post was not to change the system or create controversy. I just wanted to understand the formula and I already understood it, for which I am grateful to those who responded.

There are a lot of problems with trophies, and I think that ratalayka games are one of the biggest, because people give money literally just because of the platinum trophies. I'm sure over 90% of the people who play these games wouldn't play them if they didn't have platinum.

And really last.
If we follow the logic that the % of DLC should be reduced because not everyone has DLC, then shouldn't ratalayka platinum not count for whole platinum, because it is a joke that popped in 30-40 minutes.
Of course, this problem is supported by Sony, they are the ones who can not allow such games to have platinum, but it will be against them because then no one will buy this games from their store. It's all money, It's a pity for gamers to be subjected to this, I don't think gaming it's going in the right direction.

[mekktor]

The only problem with DLC rarity is that the site calls it "rarity", to keep it consistent with the base game where that is what it actually is. If it was instead just some hidden value that was used to rate the "value" of trophies, then I doubt anyone would complain. And let's be honest, that's what most people take from the number now anyway.

 

16 hours ago, Arcesius said:

It often results in NG+ trophies being less rare than NG trophies, for example.

 

This kind of thing isn't necessarily wrong if you think about what the rarity means. Base game rarity tells us what percentage of those who started the base game earned a particular trophy on that list. If we were to extend that idea to DLC trophies (which we can't, because we don't have the required information), then it's entirely possible for DLC trophies that "follow on" from base game trophies to be less rare.

 

For example, with a NG+ DLC list, a higher rarity is telling us that people who started NG+ were more likely to finish NG+ (compared to those who stared and finished NG). And that kind of makes sense, right? Not only are we looking at a more selective group who already finished NG, but NG+ is probably easier and quicker to finish on top.

 

15 hours ago, Arcesius said:

Or were they like "hey look geometric mean, maths.. let's roll with that". 

 

Yeah, that's pretty much how it went. Do you have a better suggestion on how to estimate the rarity with the limited information available for DLC? Because the two old systems (using base game owners, and using number of people who have earned a trophy in the DLC) are not it.

 

10 hours ago, DrBloodmoney said:

Also

 

Difficulty =/= Rarity ,no matter how much y'all want it to.

 

Effort = Rarity. This includes things like difficulty, time investment, how enjoyable it is... All things that only come into play when you sit down and boot up the game. How much money is in your wallet should not come into it.

 

9 hours ago, Cleggworth said:

Another reason i prefer base game owners as we know exactly how many people that is.

 

That's not a good reason to use that number. We also know the number of squares on a chess board, but we aren't going to use that number for the calculation.

 

4 hours ago, TurtlePM said:

Don't say "ahh, not all people pay for the DLC", when it's something that is available for everyone and people choose not to pay/start the DLC.

 

Also not a good reason. Every game on PSN is (or was) available for everyone and people chose not to pay/start them. Does this mean every player should be counted in the rarity calculation for every game? Clearly we only count people who actually do pay and start the base game, and the only reason that isn't true for DLC is because that information isn't available.

 

[DrBloodmoney]

41 minutes ago, mekktor said:

Effort = Rarity. This includes things like difficulty, time investment, how enjoyable it is... All things that only come into play when you sit down and boot up the game. How much money is in your wallet should not come into it.

Nope,

Rarity = Rarity.

 

‘Effort’ and ‘difficulty’ are subjective concepts, and not easily quantifiable.

 

Rarity is objective, and is.

 

If 30 out of 100 people who have a game on their profile get a trophy, (any trophy, base game or dlc, as everyone who has a base game has all dlc on their profile whether they buy it or not) then the rarity is 30%. 

If the site factors that objective values through some convoluted formulae to try and make it more representative of some other (subjective) concept, and it is anything other than 30%, then they haven’t made it more or less accurate - All they have done is make it not mean anything at all.

 

If you want a numerical value to represent ‘Effort’ then you need some sort of voting system and averaging, as it’s entirely dependent on the opinions of the specific voter.

 

Rarity though, isn’t.

Edited May 19, 2021 by DrBloodmoney

[DrBloodmoney]

I've seen arguments that using base game owners would be inaccurate, since that is what PSN uses, and their values are 'wrong' since everything comes out as 'Ultra-Rare'.

 

I would just like to address this.

 

PSN stats are actually correct - what makes them less useful is not the formulae, but the sample set.

 

If PSNProfiles used all base-game owners as DLC owners (as they do for the S-Ranks, and as their profiles represent), PSN statistics vs PSNProfiles statistics would still be different, but both accurate.

Formulaically, they would still be both the same. The only difference would be a more relevant sample set.

 

 

If I may, I would like to use an example to represent my point:

 

Take the statistics on Male-Pattern-Baldness.

It might be true, that the percentage of humans who have Male-Pattern-Baldness is about 4%. (That's the equivalent of the PSN Statistic.)

However, it's an equally true statistic to state that 25% of Males aged 20-50 have it. (That's the PSNProfiles statistic - or would be, if DLC rarity were based on base game users)

 

Both are correct, but one is decidedly more useful, given the more relevant sample set included in the statistic.

 

However, neither statistic is - or ever could be - an accurate measure of how attractive that makes the men to prospective partners.

That is not quantifiable as a flat statistic, as there are hundreds of subsidiary factors:

 

How attractive were they before?

Who is being asked?

How many women (or men) find it a turn-off?

How many women (or men) find it a turn-on?

What hairdo did they have before?

What shape is their head?

Do they work-out?

Did a seagull just poop on them?

Do they smell?

Are they interesting or funny?

Do they have a personality?

Am I having too much fun writing this weird list? ?

 

 

The problem is, currently, PSNProfiles is trying to make the statistic tell us the attractiveness of the men, not the percentage afflicted - and in doing so, have made it represent neither.

 

They are taking what could be a useful, correct and objective value, and running it through an inane formula to try and have it represent something it is not, was never intended to be, and isn't actually quantifiable anyway - resulting is a mess of wildly misleading, contradictory and false statistics rife with anomalous oddities and being used as ammo in 15 different situations, none of which they are actually applicable to.

 

Edited May 19, 2021 by DrBloodmoney

[Arcesius]

8 hours ago, AJ_Radio said:

Before the change the DLC owners only accounted for those who did the trophies. 

 

Yes, I know. And even before that, it counted all base game owners for computing DLC rarities, as was pointed out to me. 

 

 

Quote

Then sometime in 2017 there was a change in the calculations of DLC rarity. The current formula includes all game owners, not just people who did at least one trophy in a DLC pack. Most people do not buy or play DLC, which is a good reason why a lot of DLC trophies have considerably lower trophy rarity than trophies in the base game. 

 

PSNTrophyLeaders has even more skewed trophy statistics, so I think PSNP has the best system in place right now. 

 

This continues to be your only point in favor of the current system. That it is "better than it was in 2016" (and I don't even agree with that). 

 

Let me put some numbers just to make it clear how arbitrary the PSNP DLC statistics are, and how PSNP has NOT the best system in place right now. 

 

Asume a game has 1000 owners. Assume further that 300 of those people own the DLC, and that, say, 250 of these 300 have popped at least one trophy from that DLC. 

 

• Method 1:
  The first method is to use all base game owners to compute the rarities of the DLC trophies. So in the example above, you would use 1000 as the number of owners.
  This is obviously my preferred method, as it would add consistency to how things work here, namely: 
  • DLC trophy lists are part of the games trophy list, independently of whether you have to pay for the DLC or if its free. 
  • Your own completion percentage on PSNP is affected by DLC, even if you don't buy it. 
  • The 100% rarity of a trophy list also is computed using all base game owners. 
     
• Method 2:
  This is the method you keep referring to. You only use the people that have earned at least one trophy from the DLC to determine the trophy rarities. As you point out, it leads to at least one trophy sitting at 100%, but at least, while it is still inconsistent with regards to how other metrics are computed, it uses a measurable quantity to compute the statistics.
  
  In the example above, you would use 250 people as the owners. 
   
• Method 3:
  The formula that is currently being used since 2016 or whenever it was introduced. With this method, the rarities are computed as if 500 people owned the DLC. You understand why this is so bizarre to me? It is a completely arbitrary number that is being used in a site that otherwise tries to display accurate statistics among its members. 

 

 

Quote

Statistics on PSN may be more accurate, true.

 

Never said that. Don't even agree. 

 

 

Quote

I just threw that in here because debates like this usually end in arguments anyway. 

DLC trophy rarity. Exploiting glitches in games like Hollow Knight, which you have posted against several times. EZPZ games. The Last of Us Part II. Cyberpunk 2077. The list goes on and on and on. 

 

I never posted anything related to TLoU2 or Cyberpunk, but I guess you were generalizing. Yes, I shared my opinion about exploiting Hollow Knight with other people, and of course some agreed with me, some didn't. That's what this forums are for. Not for forcing others to see things the way you do, but for sharing opinions and discussing about topics we are passionate about. 

 

 

4 hours ago, mekktor said:

This kind of thing isn't necessarily wrong if you think about what the rarity means. Base game rarity tells us what percentage of those who started the base game earned a particular trophy on that list. If we were to extend that idea to DLC trophies (which we can't, because we don't have the required information), then it's entirely possible for DLC trophies that "follow on" from base game trophies to be less rare.

 

For example, with a NG+ DLC list, a higher rarity is telling us that people who started NG+ were more likely to finish NG+ (compared to those who stared and finished NG). And that kind of makes sense, right? Not only are we looking at a more selective group who already finished NG, but NG+ is probably easier and quicker to finish on top.

 

I agree to some extent. But I have a problem with the sentence that I put in bold, as the rarity is not computed using the number of people that started NG+. It uses an arbitrary number, as you agree as well as far as I can tell. 

 

But I understand the point that you are making. 

 

 

Quote

Yeah, that's pretty much how it went. Do you have a better suggestion on how to estimate the rarity with the limited information available for DLC? Because the two old systems (using base game owners, and using number of people who have earned a trophy in the DLC) are not it.

 

Why not though? If we are talking about consistency, then the only solution is to go back to when all base game owners were counted. Otherwise you will have those discrepancies in how different statistics are computed. 

 

I've been reading up a bit on DLC purchase statistics but I have yet to find something that can be used to more accurately determine the number of owners. Not like I want to go through that effort anyways, as it's clear as day that nothing will change, even if a better suggestion is found ?

 

 

 

EDIT: Also, I just went through my list. I know I've "only" played 100 games, but among these games I have completed 67 DLC packs. Of those 67 DLCs, about 38% is free DLC. So - at least in my case - it's not like free DLC is rare. Still, the same formula is used also here. 

Edited May 19, 2021 by Arcesius

[Xylobe]

2 hours ago, mekktor said:

Effort = Rarity. This includes things like difficulty, time investment, how enjoyable it is... All things that only come into play when you sit down and boot up the game. How much money is in your wallet should not come into it.

 

I've been playing the PS3 version of Atelier Rorona Plus recently. It, like many games in the Atelier series, also has a "DX" release on PS4. The Plus and DX versions of the game are identical in both content and trophies, but the former has a 6% platinum rate, and the latter nearly 22%. If a trophy's rarity is an indication of how much effort it takes to obtain, how can it vary that wildly between two releases of the same game?

[Silocia]

7 hours ago, EdinhoN said:

If DLC percentages are calculated from all base game owners, every DLC is a pit of rare and UR trophies.

 

Do people not see the hypocrisy in this argument and it seems to be the only argument against DLC trophies being calculated from base game owners. 

 

You cannot whine about DLC's giving people rare and UR trophies when to my knowledge the rarity of trophies don't affect the leaderboard its only affected by the type (bronze, silver, gold, platinum) when people are spending a quid and getting 11 golds and a platinum in less than half an hour and then they're stacking these across regions as well. 

 

I' not meaning to single you out @EdinhoN, other people have also said the same thing.

[KondeBra]

I'm a guy who usually goes for 100% completion. I would love some free UR trophies in my profile, but I use the % to have some notion of how difficult a trophy is.

 

So I vote for keeping how it is.

[DrBloodmoney]

8 hours ago, EdinhoN said:

If DLC percentages are calculated from all base game owners, every DLC is a pit of rare and UR trophies.

 

That's because every DLC is a pit of rare and UR trophies. 

 

Fudging the formula to make it seem otherwise doesn't mean there is a problem with the data, it means there is a problem with the formula.

[Cleggworth]

2 hours ago, mekktor said:

 

That's not a good reason to use that number. We also know the number of squares on a chess board, but we aren't going to use that number for the calculation.

 

 

Its the best number to use, Its the only one we know for a start. Its the number we use for everything else as well. It makes no sense to use base game owners for literally every other stat but not DLC trophy rarity.

 

This exists because people complained that people were getting loads of ultra rares "just for playing DLC". It's a bit like the ratalaika thing for me. People shit on ratalaika players constantly because somehow it lessens their achievements. My ultra rares that I worked hard for are somehow lessened because someone else has loads just for playing DLC... what? Well if you live in a world where UR means hard then trophies that are hard in DLC might end up being <1% then. Chase those and enjoy that.

 

3 hours ago, mekktor said:

Also not a good reason. Every game on PSN is (or was) available for everyone and people chose not to pay/start them. Does this mean every player should be counted in the rarity calculation for every game? Clearly we only count people who actually do pay and start the base game, and the only reason that isn't true for DLC is because that information isn't available.

 

 

This argument doesn't work for me because it never ends when you start going down that road. You have a TV to play PS games why aren't we tracking xbox achievements.

 

I don't like MP particularly, especially those behind a paywall like on PS4 are we going to take out all MP trophies on PS4 out of stat calculation. Do we take f2p PS4 games out of that scenario though? If we do that it makes sense to take free DLC out then too right? What about games that the DLC was free for a time? Or GOTY editions, you'd have the same trophy in GOTY and vanilla versions having wildly different %. What about delisted games or closed servers?

 

As soon as you move away from the simplest solution it just gets more and more convoluted. 

 

As I've said before consistency is king. If those issues can all be solved then I'd get behind DLC owners over the completely made up stat as it now. I don't see it happening though, base game all the way.

[DrBloodmoney]

3 hours ago, mekktor said:

Also not a good reason. Every game on PSN is (or was) available for everyone and people chose not to pay/start them. Does this mean every player should be counted in the rarity calculation for every game? Clearly we only count people who actually do pay and start the base game, and the only reason that isn't true for DLC is because that information isn't available.

 

It's not about who has the potential to buy a game, it's about who has the game on their profile.

 

You don't have any choice over whether a dlc is added to your profile - if you have the base game, you have the dlc attached.

 

Don't want to play it? Fine, no problem, but you lose your 100% on PSN, and your S-Rank on this site.

Therefore, you should also be part of the sample group for the rarity.

 

Edited May 19, 2021 by DrBloodmoney