DLC % logic?

[madbuk]

5 hours ago, zid2016 said:

How is it accurate when majority of the sample size includes non dlc users. Its just bumping up rarity using non dlc player base.

100% of people with the base game also have the DLC on their list as well, so should be factored in.

[You]

What about re-releases like Resident Evil 6 where you get all the DLC included but the trophy list is the same? In that case 100% of all users own the DLC so the calculation is completely incorrect.

[Arcesius]

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

That's not what I'd want. I'd want to check rarity against actual owners, not against the maximum numbers of owners possible. If that is not possible right now - that's what I take from the discussion -, I'd rather take the error margin at the other end. We know that anyone who earns a DLC trophy owns that DLC. That number would be much closer to the actual number of DLC owners (so including those who own, but didn't play it yet) then the difference between the base game owners against the DLW owners, wouldn't it?

 

Maybe? The thing is... there is no evidence that that's the case. And the "maybe" only holds for paid DLC. All base game owners are owners of any free DLC released for that game. As I mentioned previously, I have played 67 DLC packs out of which 25 were free DLC. That's almost 40% of the DLC on my profile that I owned automatically. 

 

 

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

Are there number how many base game owners on average buy all the DLC?

 

I have been trying to find anything that could be used to estimate this, but all you get if you simply openly search for these things are general aggregated purchase statistics. Those stats also include stuff like cosmetic DLC and such, which are irrelevant to our discussion. 

 

 

4 hours ago, AJ_Radio said:

I'm mostly okay with Method 1. Method 2 is the choice I would go with, the big issue with this is how the formula is being calculated. I honestly don't recall anybody posting the actual formula for how this website computes DLC trophy rarity, maybe @MMDE or @DrBloodmoney have since they both seem to have the most knowledge in regards to mathematics, apart from yourself of course.

 

I guess you mean Method 3, since Method 2 is the one you were complaining about. 

 

I posted the formula earlier. If 'x' is the number of base game owners, and 'y' is the number of players that earned a DLC trophy, the number of DLC owners is currently computed as z = sqrt(x*y). 

 

As simple as that. 

 

Now, when it was proposed in 2016, look at SlyRipper's answer to that proposal: 

 

On 19.10.2016 at 1:54 PM, Sly Ripper said:

I like the geometric mean. TLoU Survivor at 12.18% and Grounded at 11.20%, Survivor+ at 9.21% and Grounded+ at 9.20%... makes a lot of sense.

 

That's it. He looked at some numbers and decided that they were meaningful. It's what @Briste mentioned above... an emotional decision, not one based on facts. None. 

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, enaysoft said:

What about re-releases like Resident Evil 6 where you get all the DLC included but the trophy list is the same? In that case 100% of all users own the DLC so the calculation is completely incorrect.

For you to be considered a game owner on the site, just have it on your list? even if it's 0%. the example you mentioned also applies to free games like Gems of War, Rocket League, or games like Dead by Daylight.

[Rally-Vincent---]

10 hours ago, Arcesius said:

All base game owners are owners of any free DLC released for that game. As I mentioned previously, I have played 67 DLC packs out of which 25 were free DLC. That's almost 40% of the DLC on my profile that I owned automatically.

 

They have free access to free DLC, not automatically own it (I often don't download free DLC if not distributed via patch), but I see what you mean. Basically, in a situation like this, it comes down to preference. That makes it difficult to convince one another.

[Jerry_Appleby]

I only just discovered this thread today. But as someone that has over 120 games with DLCs done to 100% (And I mean 120 games, not DLC packs, that number would be way higher if I bothered counting them), a guy that studies math, and enjoys calculating things, I think the system that is being used right now works perfectly as a middle ground.

 

I remember looking into a bunch of games with DLC trophies a few years ago before the system first changed, and noticed 2 sides of things when it comes to rarity and the systems in place:

 

The original system, it worked by deciding game owners as the number of people that earned at least 1 trophy from the DLCs. That worked well if a game had an easy gimme trophy as part of the DLC, like complete the first DLC mission (GTA IV TLatD for example). When a game has a trophy like that, where basically 99% of the players could earn that trophy, you could get as close to possible completion % estimates, which was neat.

However, for a lot of the other games, they only have difficult trophies for doing everything, like finishing a bunch of tasks to 100%, so you could have a super hard game with common DLC trophies over 90%, which is not fair to those that worked hard to get their game to 100% (games like that Capcom Arcade game, or Batman Arkham City come to mind in this scenario).

But if there was a way to convince game developers to always include a gimme trophy, then the first system would work the greatest.

 

In a system like PSNTL's, they go with Game Owners as DLC owners regardless of if they actually bought the DLC or not. This leads to a massive influx of UR trophies for nearly every DLC out there. Now I like my UR trophies, but even I feel that having most DLC trophies considered UR feels too weird. Also, nearly every game that was on PS Plus has DLC trophies, and all of them are extremely rare under this system, which doesn't give an accurate representation of the actual rarity when it comes to people actually playing them. The only thing this system is good for is boosting your UR numbers.

 

With the current system, at least there's a middle ground due to the averaging process. Most trophies will usually end up between 15-40% rarity, but for the games that have actually difficult trophies, they usually stay VR or UR, whereas ones that have easier trophies will fluctuate around Uncommon or Common. It's the best thing available right now to try and appease people on both sides.

 

[A1rPun]

Only count "base game owners" if they earned a trophy after the DLC released.

/thread

[AmazingNoeder]

On 5/18/2021 at 8:17 AM, kikataa said:

 

 

Thanks for the comprehensive answer. I like the system in psntrophyleaders much more. I have 122 UR trophies there, and only 65 UR trophies here.

You like the system only cuz it benefits you

There  on TrophyLeaders anyone can get easy UR and prestige by only getting easy trophies that have their rarity inflated by lots of people who didn't even have the dlc and count to the % of the trophy

People who don't care to 100% Only the plat,

People who got the plat and them after ages a dlc was released and they didn't bother to get the game again

Yes,dlc trophies % here isn't perfect and sometimes hard trophies can have an "unfair" % 

Sometimes dlc sets only have 1 trophy

But saying that the actual system is broken or unfair only cuz you don't have easy rare trophies like trophy Leaders 

You think is fair to say that you have a 0.5% trophy when 80% of the players don't even have the Chance to get this trophy cuz they don't have the dlc?

[meterano7]

On 18.5.2021 at 0:56 PM, Arcesius said:

Because the rarities are not computed based on the number of base game owners. 

 

Instead, the number of DLC owners is manipulated. It is computed as the geometric mean between the number of base game owners, and the number of players that have achieved at least a trophy in the DLC. 

 

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

 

It is a manipulated, misleading, manufactured rarity, but it is what it is. 

So what you are saying is that the rarity isnt even computed as a percentage of dlc owners? 

[DrBloodmoney]

3 hours ago, meterano7 said:

So what you are saying is that the rarity isnt even computed as a percentage of dlc owners? 

 

No, it's wonky as hell here.

 

 

As an example:

(The actual numbers have probably changed a little since I originally posted this, but the discrepancy will still be the same)

 

Quote

If anyone ever wants a perfect demonstration of just how much the DLC rarities on this website make no sense, look no further than Dead Cells. ?

 

The Collector is the Boss of the Observatory, which can only be accessed through the Astrolab.

 

 

 

 

- it's never going to change, so I wouldn't worry about it - you just need to use other sites for rarity counts if you want any reality to it.

Annoying, but a small price to pay in the grand scheme of things, since this site does a lot of other things very well.

 

Edited May 27, 2022 by DrBloodmoney

[HusKy]

Just realized another anomaly with this weird system: if you make a progress towards any DLC trophy that has progress tracker (e.g. "play match 5 times" and you are at 3/5), the website does not count you as an owner of that particular DLC even though you obviously are.

 

That makes rarities for DLCs like this one even more inflated -- in this particular case ~6.8x higher:

vs

Edited January 13, 2023 by HusKy

[MonaSaxPayne]

On 5/18/2021 at 0:16 PM, kevao97 said:

now more seriously, not even psn does the correct calculation, let alone psnp. Sony calculates the rarity of dlcs trophies assuming that all game owners also have dlcs

 

????

 

this is exactly how it should be calculated

 

are u one of those ppl who think if u have the plat for a game but never bought/played the dlc, your trophy list should still read 100% anyway?

 

 

[sepheroithisgod]

1 hour ago, HusKy said:

Just realized another anomaly with this weird system: if you make a progress towards any DLC trophy that has progress tracker (e.g. "play match 5 times" and you are at 3/5), the website does not count you as an owner of that particular DLC even though you obviously are.

 

That makes rarities for DLCs like this one even more inflated -- in this particular case ~6.8x higher:

vs

Must have been an oversight. Hopefully, @Sly Ripper can correct it.

[hore]

I'm surprised the people lobbying for ego-stroking inflated DLC rarity aren't also lobbying for PSN rarity to replace PSNP rarity 

[DrBloodmoney]

12 minutes ago, hore said:

I'm surprised the people lobbying for ego-stroking inflated DLC rarity aren't also lobbying for PSN rarity to replace PSNP rarity 

I’m surprised the people arguing against using real DLC rarities aren’t also lobbying for maths lessons to replace the number “5” with a peace sign, and the number “7” with a fried egg. 

[KennethMcCormick]

4 minutes ago, DrBloodmoney said:

I’m surprised the people arguing against using real DLC rarities aren’t also lobbying for maths lessons to replace the number “5” with a peace sign, and the number “7” with a fried egg. 

 

Actually, it was voted last year, and since 1st January, it’s now ☮️ + ? = ?, which any astronomer, accountant or programmer will tell you is much clearer and accurate.

[DrBloodmoney]

3 minutes ago, KennethMcCormick said:

 

Actually, it was voted last year, and since 1st January, it’s now  +  = , which any astronomer, accountant or programmer will tell you is much clearer and accurate.

?
 

I give this response a ?/☂️

 

 

[Mellenthin]

On 13/01/2023 at 4:30 PM, hore said:

I'm surprised the people lobbying for ego-stroking inflated DLC rarity aren't also lobbying for PSN rarity to replace PSNP rarity 

While my ego is often close to bursting, there's no reason whatsoever to invalidate one specific group's goals and nobody else's.

 

If you seriously want me to accept being shot down for buying and completing content as the next guy whilst every stacker, auto-popper and shovelware spammer is left unchecked, then you're simply out of your mind.

Edited January 14, 2023 by Mellenthin

[AvengedEvil]

On 13.1.2023 at 4:30 PM, hore said:

I'm surprised the people lobbying for ego-stroking inflated DLC rarity aren't also lobbying for PSN rarity to replace PSNP rarity 

 

Replacing PSNP rarity with PSN rarity would be absurd. But is it too much to ask that unregistered users get updated weekly again?

 

Also, as long as any DLC shows up in my trophy list, I should count as an owner. It doesn't matter if I own / played the DLC or not.

[hore]

1 hour ago, AvengedEvil said:

 

Replacing PSNP rarity with PSN rarity would be absurd. But is it too much to ask that unregistered users get updated weekly again?

 

Also, as long as any DLC shows up in my trophy list, I should count as an owner. It doesn't matter if I own / played the DLC or not.

 

"Replacing PSNP rarity with PSN rarity would be absurd" - why? Is it because trophies are a niche of the overarching PSN ecosystem, thus PSN rarity is skewed and meaningless?

 

I hope that's not the reason, because the same can be said about DLC rarity, since completionism is similarly a niche of the overarching trophy ecosystem. Forum otakus detest and vehemently deny this notion, yet platonism is the prevailing approach to trophy hunting outside of these otaku communities.

 

If these people aren't just whURs seeking to inflate their stats, then there's always Husky's script to display "global" DLC rarity.

[Helyx]

Trophynomics sure is confusing.

[Mellenthin]

41 minutes ago, hore said:

 

"Replacing PSNP rarity with PSN rarity would be absurd" - why? Is it because trophies are a niche of the overarching PSN ecosystem, thus PSN rarity is skewed and meaningless?

 

I hope that's not the reason, because the same can be said about DLC rarity, since completionism is similarly a niche of the overarching trophy ecosystem. Forum otakus detest and vehemently deny this notion, yet platonism is the prevailing approach to trophy hunting outside of these otaku communities.

 

If these people aren't just whURs seeking to inflate their stats, then there's always Husky's script to display "global" DLC rarity.

 

Yeah, you're insane.

[AvengedEvil]

7 hours ago, hore said:

"Replacing PSNP rarity with PSN rarity would be absurd" - why? Is it because trophies are a niche of the overarching PSN ecosystem, thus PSN rarity is skewed and meaningless?

 

If Sony would get rid of cheaters, I would be all for using PSN rarity.

[Dry]

10 hours ago, AvengedEvil said:

Replacing PSNP rarity with PSN rarity would be absurd, but is it too much to ask that unregistered users get updated weekly again?

 

Sly replied to a post of mine months ago reaffirming his reason for why he disabled this, which still makes zero sense to me.

 

I'd be very happy if even once a month PSNP goes down for an entire hour to update all 5.6+ million tracked profiles (as of this post), both registered and unregistered but given the site owner's activity (or lack thereof) over the past 4-5 years aside from him making way for PS5 platform trophies and introducting a much needed "shovelware filter", such a beneficial event may never occur...

 

...Though I'd like to be proven wrong.

[mrmivo]

After reading this thread and related ones, the main issue I see is the lack of consistency.

 

If the completion percentage assumes every base game owner owns the DLC, then in my view so should the rarity calculation. Alternatively, if DLC trophy rarities are based on an arbitrary assumption, then the completion percentage should also be based on the same arbitrary assumption.

 

The results would not be accurate either way since the actual number of DLC owners is unknown and indeterminable, but they would at least be consistently inaccurate and in sync with each other (like an out of tune guitar where the strings are correctly tuned in relation to each other).