Can we relegate threads about shovelware to some sort of sub-section?

[CelestialRequiem]

52 minutes ago, Thrillhelm said:

The idea is flawed since it also hits easier trophies of renowned games, like Little Big Planet. And games like Ratchet and Clank Rift Apart and Ghost of Tsushima completely disappear.

Those games are worth the sacrifice. 

[SKiL_Clash]

Playing Dark Souls too much made me miss the live entertainment on this website. ? 

 

Hope for another show next week ?

 

 

[agorazUHD]

I think that's really the big sticking point here: Effort.

 

I know I have some cheese on my profile (and yes I play some easy games in-between better ones while I 'work' for those harder plats), but the idea of a wall of easy stacks is what really angers the more dedicated community members. This current division in the trophy hunter section on gaming here is starting to remind me of the big thing that started when the Wii first came out: Hardcore vs. Casual.

 

It sounded so funny at the time, but the idea really came from new players suddenly thinking they are 'gamers' because they got their first console and now 'game' like everyone else. I think now we are seeing this in the trophy hunting community as availability and ease of achievements has become more a focal point for newer/older(?) gamers wanting to get into the trophy scene.

 

What I'm getting at is: this is becoming a Hardcore vs. Casual trophy hunting debate on the forums. Which.... apparently gets started back up on Sundays due to scheduling. ?

[AJ_Radio]

I honestly hope this thread can last a bit longer and not just vanish into thin air. I'm getting really irritated at posting my opinions on these games only to have my comments either deleted outright, or the entire thread removed without question.

 

A couple friends of mine on these forums have also had numerous posts deleted, and I feel this is because they might spark a heated debate regarding Breakthrough Gaming Arcade and to a lesser extent.... Ratalaika.

 

I have stuff like Sound Shapes and Sly Cooper autopopped, but all this shovelware that has come thru these past couple years has really made trophy hunting to be more of a joke. People have said this a thousand times by now, but I largely feel it is true.

 

Going to have to side with the OP on this one, and I'm happy to see someone who shares the same opinions as me who doesn't resort to outright insulting.

[Helyx]

2 hours ago, enaysoft said:

I'm just more concerned that people are happy

 

Yeah, I can't stand it when people are happy either.

 

10 minutes ago, AJ_Radio said:

I'm getting really irritated at posting my opinions

 

Preach.

Edited July 7, 2021 by Helyx

[You]

1 minute ago, Helyx said:

 

Yeah, I can't stand it when people are happy either.

 

Very nice of you to incorrectly quote me out of context there.

[Helyx]

15 minutes ago, enaysoft said:

Very nice of you to incorrectly quote me out of context there.

 

I quoted the important part.

 

People enjoy these games (for whatever reasons), and it gets everyone bent out of shape over nothing.

[DrBloodmoney]

1 hour ago, steel6burgh said:

no that doesn't make it flawed.  that is the whole point easy trophies are easy trophy it doesn't matter what game they're in. the trophies in those games above 50% would still count.  Your way of thinking is flawed because you are making a biased argument.  You play these games you don't want to loose them ..I get it.  

There are perfectly reasonable arguments on both sides about the validity of rarity-specific leaderboards - but what makes the discussion difficult to have at any kind of objective level is when this kind of argument gets used.

 

Assuming that the only reason someone is making an argument against something is because they would personally be negatively affected by it is a very craven and cynical way of looking at any debate  - and it renders any discussion of the relative merits of it impossible.

 

The problem with the whole rarity debate is that everyone assumes everyone else is making their arguments from a completely self-interested point of view - the ‘pro’ camp spend their time looking at anyone who disagree’s profile trying to prove their viewpoint to be one of ‘self-preservation’, and the ‘anti’ camp spend their time looking at anyone who is ‘pro’s profile trying to prove their viewpoint to be one of ‘self-aggrandisement’. 
 

Not every debate is that craven, nor is every argument that hypocritical or cynical. 
 

According to PSNTL’s rarity leaderboard, I would - for example - still place far higher than you would on a rarity board - but I still fall in the ‘against’ camp - for exactly the reasons @djb5f, @Thrillhelm and some others here have said.

That opinion is not based on a cynical attempt to ‘keep my place’ on any board - it is simply because I fundamentally disagree with the proposals put forward on this site so far for how such a rarity leaderboard would function.

 

 

By all means - let’s continue having the discussion - but in doing so, can we all stop just assuming that everyone else’s points of view are based solely on selfish reasons?

 

Edited July 7, 2021 by DrBloodmoney

[Sendai-Horatio]

Honestly while I have played a few easy plat "games". Lately I've been wanting to go after some of the harder trophies. The problem is, I mostly play RPGs and finding Ultra Rare trophies to games that I like want to play, doesn't seem very likely. So I am currently trying to focus in on Very Rare and Rares since most single player offline RPGs seem to have those.

 

You wind up learning and using strategies that you normally wouldn't. Eventually I think many of these easy plat people are going to burn out and want something different.

[AJ_-_808]

56 minutes ago, DrBloodmoney said:

According to PSNTL’s rarity leaderboard, I would - for example - still place far higher than you would on a rarity board - but I still fall in the ‘against’ camp - for exactly the reasons @djb5f, @Thrillhelm and some others here have said.

 

 

I was hesitant to further hijack this thread, but I think that horse took off.

 

 

@djb5f just wants a scaling point value, which, as far as I know, nobody has argued against.

 

@Thrillhelm wants a high enough cutoff point to include things that, to be frank, arent rare at that percentage.  Although, I think there's a misunderstanding. For example, the 70% trophy in SMB might not count on said board, but that doesn't exclude the entire game.  People would still get scaling points for each other SMB trophy under EG 50%.

 

There really isn't any good argument against an (additional) rarity board. It allows whomever would like to compete on it a chance to compete a bit more fairly (yes, this is subjective), while letting anyone that doesn't care for it the ability to keep chasing the original carrot.  It wouldnt be for everyone, but then again,  the current leaderboard isnt either.

 

Edit

Addendum 

A rarity leaderboard would also get more exposure to lost gems as more people purposely target ultrarares from games with few owners.  And with a constantly changing (scaling) value system in place, it definitely adds a different sense of competition for those that want it

Edited July 7, 2021 by AJ_-_808

[steel6burgh]

8 minutes ago, DrBloodmoney said:

There are perfectly reasonable arguments on both sides about the validity of rarity-specific leaderboards - but what makes the discussion difficult to have at any kind of objective level is when this kind of argument gets used.

 

Assuming that the only reason someone is making an argument against something is because they would personally be negatively affected by it is a very craven and cynical way of looking at any debate  - and it renders any discussion of the relative merits of it impossible.

 

The problem with the whole rarity debate is that everyone assumes everyone else is making their arguments from a completely self-interested point of view - the ‘pro’ camp spend their time looking at anyone who disagree’s profile trying to prove their viewpoint to be one of ‘self-preservation’, and the ‘anti’ camp spend their time looking at anyone who is ‘pro’s profile trying to prove their viewpoint to be one of ‘self-aggrandisement’. 
 

Not every debate is that craven, nor is every argument that hypocritical or cynical. 
 

According to PSNTL’s rarity leaderboard, I would - for example - still place far higher than you would on a rarity board - but I still fall in the ‘against’ camp - for exactly the reasons @djb5f, @Thrillhelm and some others here have said.

That opinion is not based on a cynical attempt to ‘keep my place’ on any board - it is simply because I fundamentally disagree with the proposals put forward on this site so far for how such a rarity leaderboard would function.

 

 

By all means - let’s continue having the discussion - but in doing so, can we all stop just assuming that everyone else’s points of view are based solely on selfish reasons?

 

ok well lets look at it from a completely different point of view.   I know for a fact I'm never going to be on top of either leaderboard.  So I can guarantee you that I'm not looking at it from a selfish point of view.  I also don't think in the least that I'm some fabulous gamer.  I do like fair competition and reasonable competition.  But lets be realistic people are in many cases selfish.  So we could assume that some people are looking at it from a selfish point of view. I mean it doesn't defy the realm of possibility.  But lets look at it form the point of view that eliminating the reward for playing these types of games would hurt the people putting out these types of games. Isn't that reason enough?  

 

If this were EA pushing micro transactions it would be completely absurd from almost everyone's viewpoint .  But it's not Evil EA it's a lesser know that happens to be just as evil, breakthrough gaming.  Let's face it and call it what it is.  A trophy popping is positive reinforcement is it not?  That ding has been proven to be  addictive whether it be the sound a thumbs up makes on FB, the ding from a text message on our phone that tells us social interaction has occurred.  social interaction being a necessity in our lives for our mental health as well as survival, or a ding from a trophy popping. those dings have been designed to keeps us engaged.  So now we have companies pushing out 500 maybe 1000 dings in a day in the form of really low budget as you once said minimal output games. 

 

As a result look at the reasoning and logic some of these people are using like our number 3 on the leaderboard who claims we can't have a rarity leaderboard because someone might get easy UR's.  what kind of logic is that?  this guy spends his days playing the easiest of the easiest game to be atop the current leaderboard.   This is addictive reasoning. some of the people here are suffering from addictive behavior.  They are literally spending thousands of dollars a year and possibly much more in time worth of money playing these games to get that ding and gratification. In many cases they haven't engaged with their spouse in years, they haven't walked the dog, attended family events, spent enough time with their kids or quality time with family or children.

 

Now one thing is for certain in life that is change. We are always changing.  Change is key element to survival.  Without change thing become stale.  If we hadn't sought to control blood pressure millions of people who have died prematurely and that would have effected the world in all sorts of ways.  But we did and as a result now we must all carry health insurance to afford the blood pressure medicine.  This desire to live longer has come with both negative and postitve results.  We live longer but life is more expensive.  When trophy hunting came to be easy senseless platinums were not really in existence. had someone told the developers of the current formula for our leaderboard this was going to be the way that ratalaka and breakthrough gaming would take all the competition out of trophy hunting for self benefit at the expense of many gamers mental health and social life and finances, that person may have said we need to guard against this.  We need to assign values according to rarity, perhaps, could have been the solution.  Who knows? But this wan't the case then.  Now it is!  So should we let the game become stale, should we let breakthrough gaming prosper and ratalaka at the expense of all of us?  Should we not implement change?  

 

I followed a guy on the top of the leaderboards who made some videos on youtube when he decided to quit gaming for trophies.  He seemed very depressed like it had taken a toll.  He wasn't only getting enjoyment out of gaming but it seemed like a lot of life had been sapped out of him.  I think a lot of these guys playing these games day after day are in bad mental shape and the companies are exploiting that.  I think their reasoning is that of a person exhibiting addictive behavior.   If it were a crack dealer we would lock him up in jail.  If it were a cigarette company we would have them put all sort of warning on their product and so on.  To me this shit is no different yet it's ok with everybody to let these companies continue to operate.  i think we have the power and responsibility to put these evil fuckers out of business who profit off other people's misery.   If you tell me you're having fun playing 15 breakthrough game per day, day after day something is wrong with you. should we not help those that can't help theirselves?

 

To be honest i hate these companies because of what they're doing more than I blame a person for getting a easy platinum. it is getting to be a a eyesore as someone said and people are starting to sound really too involved in these game for it to be healthy.  maybe there shouldn't be any leaderboard.  Maybe that is a better solution. Now of course this isn't as serious as blood pressure and longevity and our health but we spend a lot of time doing this hobby.  Shouldn't we make it as perfect and good as possible to pass on to the next generation of trophy hunters or just accept it for how it is?  Of course i don't think we have any control or say so at all.  We just hang out here. 

[Arcesius]

5 hours ago, Thrillhelm said:

I also remember that part of the discussion was having trophies with more than 50% rarity not counted, which was a terrible idea.

 

It is a terrible idea in your eyes. But many users on this page actually had a civil and in my opinion meaningful discussion about the existence of such a LB. 

 

I mean, I don't give a shit about the current LB, but I'm still placed on it and can live with it. I just ignore it. Couldn't you just ignore the rarity LB if it were ever to be implemented? You can continue to only care about the main one, it's not going anywhere. 

 

 

4 hours ago, TimeLordCrow13y said:

Also, @steel6burgh-I’d have no problem with a rarity leaderboard, but personally don’t think 50% rarity (plenty of AAA titles that are simply popular & fun hover around this) is high enough. 75% or higher might be more appropriate. 

 

If something is achieved by 3/4 people, it just cannot be called "rare" by any stretch of the imagination. In fact, we had a poll with several options on it (50 and 75% were both on there), and 50% won, so there's no point in further arguments. 

 

Personally, I wanted to make a cut at around 30%. Again, if you would win the lottery every third time you play... It just wouldn't be a rare event. 

 

 

And about the AAA games... It's a rarity leaderboard, not a quality leaderboard. There are plenty of trash UR games that would count. This leaderboard is not meant to keep bad games out of the equation. It's meant to add another form of competition to the community, other than just increasing your trophy count. 

 

So Spider Man would give 0 points.. so what? It doesn't have a single trophy that can be considered "rare"...

 

 

 

Now, to stay on topic. let me actually respond to the OP quoting my initial message:

 

13 hours ago, F1rstinFlight said:

I don't even know what an activity stream is, but I appreciate your suggestion here because it sounds way more feasible than what I proposed. I guess the issue would be that I have to manually toggle off every single stack of every single trashware game and continue to do this as more get added weekly? That seems like more trouble than it's worth.

 

Oh yeah I could have explained that... Basically you can create your own "activity stream" that, when you come back to the forums, just shows you new posts in the subforums that you selected for that stream. Like the "Unread Content" button, but customized to exclude subforums you don't care about. Personally, I wanted to use it to exclude "Forum Games" and all that shit I don't care about, but then noticed that you need to actually toggle on all subforums for all games you want to include, meaning that you would need to manually add the subforums of newly released games to the stream. 

 

But you are right.. If we inverted this and made it "toggle off" games instead, you would indeed need to keep excluding games week after week... ?

 

Edited July 7, 2021 by Arcesius

[DrBloodmoney]

32 minutes ago, steel6burgh said:

ok well lets look at it from a completely different point of view.   I know for a fact I'm never going to be on top of either leaderboard.  So I can guarantee you that I'm not looking at it from a selfish point of view.  I also don't think in the least that I'm some fabulous gamer.  I do like fair competition and reasonable competition.  But lets be realistic people are in many cases selfish.  So we could assume that some people are looking at it from a selfish point of view. I mean it doesn't defy the realm of possibility.  But lets look at it form the point of view that eliminating the reward for playing these types of games would hurt the people putting out these types of games. Isn't that reason enough?  

 

If you were referring only to Breakthrough, then I might align closer to your point of view here - but I don't think you, or many people on here, are. This thread is full of people lumping Ratalaika in with Breakthrough. I realise the difference may seem semantic to some who only care about trophies, but it isn't to me.

 

Ratalaika are the only publisher really who, en masse, are releasing the small-dev indie games on console. Without their (abhorrent) trophy policy, they wouldn't make enough money to continue putting out these games on console, and I like seeing these games. I don't want to play them on Steam - I want to play them on my Playstation, because that's where I like to do my gaming.

Yes, some are rubbish - that is true of virtually all publishers when you look at the full stable of their output - but some are good, and a company being a pipeline for small dev indie output to gain a wider audience is - in every other industry (books / Film etc.) lauded and applauded.

I don't see Artificial Eye getting flack from film-buffs just because some of the indie films they release are poor quality - they get (rightly) applauded for being able to release that category at all.

 

As far as I'm concerned, the EZPZ stacks that some people use these games for are an acceptable sacrifice for the continued existence of a company who are doing what should be considered a good thing - giving a wider audience to small-dev, small-team indie games.

 

 

Quote

If this were EA pushing micro transactions it would be completely absurd from almost everyone's viewpoint .  But it's not Evil EA it's a lesser know that happens to be just as evil, breakthrough gaming.  Let's face it and call it what it is.  A trophy popping is positive reinforcement is it not?  That ding has been proven to be  addictive whether it be the sound a thumbs up makes on FB, the ding from a text message on our phone that tells us social interaction has occurred.  social interaction being a necessity in our lives for our mental health as well as survival, or a ding from a trophy popping. those dings have been designed to keeps us engaged.  So now we have companies pushing out 500 maybe 1000 dings in a day in the form of really low budget as you once said minimal output games. 

 

As a result look at the reasoning and logic some of these people are using like our number 3 on the leaderboard who claims we can't have a rarity leaderboard because someone might get easy UR's.  what kind of logic is that?  this guy spends his days playing the easiest of the easiest game to be atop the current leaderboard.   This is addictive reasoning. some of the people here are suffering from addictive behavior.  They are literally spending thousands of dollars a year and possibly much more in time worth of money playing these games to get that ding and gratification. In many cases they haven't engaged with their spouse in years, they haven't walked the dog, attended family events, spent enough time with their kids or quality time with family or children.

 

I'm not 100% sure what you are getting at here. Yes, the dopamine ding of a trophy can be addictive - so can a lot of things - but the argument that to counter that we need 'government' (or in this case 'governmental') regulation is never really a good solution.

 

I'm an alcoholic - I have to avoid drinking, because I don't want a drink, I want 20 drinks.  

 

That doesn't mean that the solution is to ban the sales of alcohol to everyone, or to start shaming folks who drink in moderation.

 

I don't buy the argument that people want a rarity board to "protect trophy whores from themselves" any more than I buy the argument that people want to ban films they don't like to "protect the children" - and even if it were true, it's not a good argument.

 

 

Quote

I followed a guy on the top of the leaderboards who made some videos on youtube when he decided to quit gaming for trophies.  He seemed very depressed like it had taken a toll.  He wasn't only getting enjoyment out of gaming but it seemed like a lot of life had been sapped out of him.  I think a lot of these guys playing these games day after day are in bad mental shape and the companies are exploiting that.  I think their reasoning is that of a person exhibiting addictive behavior.   If it were a crack dealer we would lock him up in jail.  If it were a cigarette company we would have them put all sort of warning on their product and so on.  To me this shit is no different yet it's ok with everybody to let these companies continue to operate.  i think we have the power and responsibility to put these evil fuckers out of business who profit off other people's misery.   If you tell me you're having fun playing 15 breakthrough game per day, day after day something is wrong with you. should we not help those that can't help theirselves?

 

See above. Also, people with addictions do, at some point, need to take responsibility for their own addictions.

We as a society have a duty of care, but that duty of care should not extend to simply banning behaviour of a whole society to take away the possibility of access to the addictive substance. Addiction isn't treatable that way - trust me. It is an ongoing process involving far more nuanced and specific and personal methods. 

 

 

Quote

To be honest i hate these companies because of what they're doing more than I blame a person for getting a easy platinum. it is getting to be a a eyesore as someone said and people are starting to sound really too involved in these game for it to be healthy.  maybe there shouldn't be any leaderboard.  Maybe that is a better solution. Now of course this isn't as serious as blood pressure and longevity and our health but we spend a lot of time doing this hobby.  

 

The companies are just doing what all companies do - working within the capitalistic system they operate within.

 

The only way to truly counter them - if you disagree with their philosophy - is to not engage with it, and convince others to do the same - but people rarely react positively to being diminished, shamed or forced to change. 

 

I don't like Breakthrough - so I don't engage with them. That's the best course of action as far as I'm concerned. 

 

Quote

Shouldn't we make it as perfect and good as possible to pass on to the next generation of trophy hunters or just accept it for how it is?  

 

There is no "next generation of trophy hunters" - we are it.

The "next generation" are primarily the people you are railing against - it is generally the younger Trophy types who are stacking these games - those of us still avoiding Breakthrough are in the minority, and getting less relevant every day.

 

Quote

Of course i don't think we have any control or say so at all.  We just hang out here. 

 

True! ?

 

 

 

 

In the end - I think a rarity board is only going to have the same effect as the current one - just from the opposite end.

People will still be doing what I personally dislike - choosing what to play based on the "rarity" of the trophies.

The only difference is, they will be choosing to play a bunch of niche, broken or downright bad games with very rare trophies, instead of easy, cheap, throwaway ones like they do now - but that is actually worse from my point of view - simply because those games take longer.

 

In the end, the thing that suffers is still the same - sales of good games, and the correlating health of gaming as an industry and an entity.

 

If someone stacks a bunch of Breakthrough rubbish, that takes them a half hour. Yes, it's silly and frivolous fare, but it doesn't take time away from them playing good games - they are still likely buying and supporting some good games too. If they are spending all their time grinding out crappy Ultra-rare, they are not only supporting bad games, they are also leaving themselves no time to engage with the good ones - therefore arguably doing more harm to the health of the industry, and harming the production of future good games to much greater extent.

 

 

 

Edited July 7, 2021 by DrBloodmoney

[dmland12]

Are we having forbidden discussions here?  OK, sure.

 

I'll never understand the opposition to additional leaderboards as long as there's some support among users for them.  If you prefer the original, it's still there.  Why does there have to be only one leaderboard?  I don't get it.

[TimeLordCrow13y]

13 minutes ago, Arcesius said:

If something is achieved by 3/4 people, it just cannot be called "rare" by any stretch of the imagination. In fact, we had a poll with several options on it (50 and 75% were both on there), and 50% won, so there's no point in further arguments. 

 

Personally, I wanted to make a cut at around 30%. Again, if you would win the lottery every third time you play... It just wouldn't be a rare event. 

 

 

And about the AAA games... It's a rarity leaderboard, not a quality leaderboard. There are plenty of trash UR games that would count. This leaderboard is not meant to keep bad games out of the equation. It's meant to add another form of competition to the community, other than just increasing your trophy count. 

 

So Spider Man would give 0 points.. so what? It doesn't have a single trophy that can be considered "rare"...

 

I get your point. However, IMO, if such a system were to be implemented-DLC rarities need to change to accurately reflect their TRUE rarity-if pure rarity and not quality/actual difficulty is what matters, that is. 

 

If that change were made there might actually be some rare trophies for Spider Man/other AAA titles with DLC. 

[Arcesius]

2 minutes ago, TimeLordCrow13y said:

I get your point. However, IMO, if such a system were to be implemented-DLC rarities need to change to accurately reflect their TRUE rarity-if pure rarity and not quality/actual difficulty is what matters, that is. 

 

Yes!! Actually, that needs to change regardless of the implementation of a rarity LB ?

[pinkrobot_pb]

People are fighting over meaningless data every day on this website. About 80% of the tracked profiles are just casual players or alts with not even a single platinum to their name. Most of your UR's are UR because the vast majority of the tracked profiles are not actually trophy hunters themselves. This is a point that is habitually glossed over because there is not a single person in this community that would benefit from acknowledging it.

Edited July 7, 2021 by pinkrobot_pb

[DrBloodmoney]

6 minutes ago, TimeLordCrow13y said:

 

I get your point. However, IMO, if such a system were to be implemented-DLC rarities need to change to accurately reflect their TRUE rarity-if pure rarity and not quality/actual difficulty is what matters, that is. 

 

If that change were made there might actually be some rare trophies for Spider Man/other AAA titles with DLC. 

 

2 minutes ago, Arcesius said:

 

Yes!! Actually, that needs to change regardless of the implementation of a rarity LB ?

 

It's nice when there's a point so self-evident that, ever all of us, with our different takes on the larger issues, can all unanimously agree! ??

[steel6burgh]

5 minutes ago, DrBloodmoney said:

 

If you were referring only to Breakthrough, then I might align closer to your point of view here - but I don't think you, or many people on here, are. This thread is full of people lumping Ratalaika in with Breakthrough. I realise the difference may seem semantic to some who only care about trophies, but it isn't to me.

 

Ratalaika are the only publisher really who, en masse, are releasing the small-dev indie games on console. Without their (abhorrent) trophy policy, they wouldn't make enough money to continue putting out these games on console, and I like seeing these games. I don't want to play them on Steam - I want to play them on my Playstation, because that's where I like to do my gaming.

Yes, some are rubbish - that is true of virtually all publishers when you look at the full stable of their output - but some are good, and a company being a pipeline for small dev indie output to gain a wider audience is - in every other industry (books / Film etc.) lauded and applauded.

I don't see Artificial Eye getting flack from film-buffs just because some of the indie films they release are poor quality - they get (rightly) applauded for being able to release that category at all.

 

As far as I'm concerned, the EZPZ stacks that some people use these games for are an acceptable sacrifice for the continued existence of a company who are doing what should be considered a good thing - giving a wider audience to small-dev, small-team indie games.

 

 

 

I'm not 100% sure what you are getting at here. Yes, the dopamine ding of a trophy can be addictive - so can a lot of things - but the argument that to counter that we need 'government' (or in this case 'governmental') regulation is never really a good solution.

 

I'm an alcoholic - I have to avoid drinking, because I don't want a drink, I want 20 drinks.  

 

That doesn't mean that the solution is to ban the sales of alcohol to everyone, or to start shaming folks who drink in moderation.

 

I don't buy the argument that people want a rarity board to "protect trophy whores from themselves" any more than I buy the argument that people want to ban films they don't like to "protect the children" - and even if it were true, it's not a good argument.

 

 

 

See above. Also, people with addictions do, at some point, need to take responsibility for their own addictions.

We as a society have a duty of care, but that duty of care should not extend to simply banning behaviour of a whole society to take away the possibility of access to the addictive substance. Addiction isn't treatable that way - trust me. It is an ongoing process involving far more nuanced and specific and personal methods. 

 

 

 

The companies are just doing what all companies do - working within the capitalistic system they operate within.

 

The only way to truly counter them - if you disagree with their philosophy - is to not engage with it, and convince others to do the same - but people rarely react positively to being diminished, shamed or forced to change. 

 

I don't like Breakthrough - so I don't engage with them. That's the best course of action as far as I'm concerned. 

 

 

There is no "next generation of trophy hunters" - we are it.

The "next generation" are primarily the people you are railing against - it is generally the younger Trophy types who are stacking these games - those of us still avoiding Breakthrough are in the minority, and getting less relevant every day.

 

 

True! 

 

 

 

 

In the end - I think a rarity board is only going to have the same effect as the current one - just from the opposite end.

People will still be doing what I personally dislike - choosing what to play based on the "rarity" of the trophies.

The only difference is, they will be choosing to play a bunch of niche, broken or downright bad games with very rare trophies, instead of easy, cheap, throwaway ones like they do now - but that is actually worse from my point of view - simply because those games take longer.

 

In the end, the thing that suffers is still the same - sales of good games, and the correlating health of gaming as an industry and an entity.

 

If someone stacks a bunch of Breakthrough rubbish, that takes them a half hour. Yes, it's silly and frivolous fare, but it doesn't take time away from them playing good games - they are still likely buying and supporting some good games too. If they are spending all their time grinding out crappy Ultra-rare, they are not only supporting bad games, they are also leaving themselves no time to engage with the good ones - therefore arguably doing more harm to the health of the industry, and harming the production of future good games to much greater extent.

 

 

 

and so with all your points i still fail to realize why you're against changing the current format?  What does it hurt to have two leaderboards?  I've seen you post many times you are against it but i'm unclear why.   and to be honest yes I'm against ratalaka games as well.  Because although i agree there are some good ones most of them are not and I don't think the company cares one bit about quality.  If they happen to get a quality release great but if not they will sell it with a 5 minute trophy list..   I'm not necessarily saying that i want a rarity leaderboard to keep eery peezy gamers from hurting theirselves but you wanted a different point of view other than saying people are not in the discussion for selfish reasons so I gave you some other points of view.  Trophy hunting is addictive behavior believe it or not some people don't realize because some people don't have the addiction like some people can have a drink and not become an alcoholic.  As far as us being the last generation because this new generations is the eezy peezy generation, well it doesn't have to be that way.  These breakthrough and ratalaka games only exist because of us trophy hunters i find it hard to believe too many other people are buying them. And if you believe these games are the downfall of future generations of trophy hunters than why aren't you for eradicating them?  I sense a little confusion in you  because some of this seems a bit contradictory.

[DeepEyes7]

4 minutes ago, pinkrobot_pb said:

People are fighting over meaningless data every day on this website. About 80% of the tracked profiles are just casual players or alts with not even a single platinum to their name. Most of your UR's are UR because the vast majority of the tracked profiles are not actually trophy hunters themselves.

 

So stop the fight and start the purge.

 

I dont think so, to have your profile tracked here you need to manually update the profile here, so aside from an occasional player that stumble on this site and wanted to see how he was doing with his trophies, or the friend that wanted to see how many trophies had his other friend that doesnt care about trophies was doing, I dont see how will the profile of 80% of people that doesnt care about trophies will be updated here?

 

In the other hand, the rarity of trophies is calculated with the people that have the game in his profile (I don't know if it need to have at least one trophy unlocked or just to appear in his profile is enough) so even if people upload alts here the only way for it to count and increase the rarity of his trophies could be making hundreds of accounts with the game trophy list loaded... And even if somebody do that it only works with games with very little amount of owners to even faze it with alt accounts...

 

[DrBloodmoney]

14 minutes ago, steel6burgh said:

and so with all your points i still fail to realize why you're against changing the current format?  What does it hurt to have two leaderboards?  I've seen you post many times you are against it but i'm unclear why.  

 

The end paragraph of my post is as succinct a summary of my feelings as I can give, I'm afraid:

 

I think a rarity board is only going to have the same effect as the current one - just from the opposite end.

People will still be doing what I personally dislike - choosing what to play based on the "rarity" of the trophies.

The only difference is, they will be choosing to play a bunch of niche, broken or downright bad games with very rare trophies, instead of easy, cheap, throwaway ones like they do now - but that is actually worse from my point of view - simply because those games take longer.

 

In the end, the thing that suffers is still the same - sales of good games, and the correlating health of gaming as an industry and an entity.

 

If someone stacks a bunch of Breakthrough rubbish, that takes them a half hour. Yes, it's silly and frivolous fare, but it doesn't take time away from them playing good games - they are still likely buying and supporting some good games too. If they are spending all their time grinding out crappy Ultra-rare, they are not only supporting bad games, they are also leaving themselves no time to engage with the good ones - therefore arguably doing more harm to the health of the industry, and harming the production of future good games to much greater extent.

 

Quote

Trophy hunting is addictive behavior believe it or not some people don't realize because some people don't have the addiction like some people can have a drink and not become an alcoholic.  

 

I know - I'm making the same point as you, I think?

 

I'm saying -as someone intimately acquainted with addiction - the solution you propose is not one that would work, so that part of the argument isn't one I can buy into.

 

Quote

As far as us being the last generation because this new generations is the eezy peezy generation, well it doesn't have to be that way.  These breakthrough and ratalaka games only exist because of us trophy hunters i find it hard to believe too many other people are buying them.

 

They do sell on Steam too - not in the massively inflated numbers - but they do. I basically agree on the trophy policy - as I've said many times - however, the difference between our points of view is on the level to which that is an acceptable byproduct. I'm of the opinion that if 10% of Ratalaika games are good, that still makes the 90% that aren't and the stacks of trophies other people use them for, worthwhile - given that I don't care about someone else's trophy list, but do care abut playing games.

 

Quote

And if you believe these games are the downfall of future generations of trophy hunters than why aren't you for eradicating them?  

 

Because 'eradicating' stuff I don't like isn't necessary.

I'm not a King - I don't get to decide what everyone else can and can't do.

 

I think Fast and Furious, Star Wars, Marvel and James Cameron are the downfall of cinema - but I'm not for eradicating them either.

They aren't for me - but as long as they aren't stifling the stuff that is for me - then why would I want to remove them from other people who do like them?

 

 

Quote

I sense a little confusion in you  because some of this seems a bit contradictory.

 

The confusion is not in my points, only in your interpretation... I think?

 

I am not a stubborn mule - I pride myself on not sticking my heels in, and if I were to be convinced by counter-argument that my point of view is wrong, or had my mind changed, I'd be the first to admit it - it just hasn't been, that's all. I don't think my opinions are contradictory - just a little less black and white than "Ban them All" or "EZPZ Rules!".

 

Sorry if they seem so - I really am trying to put across my genuine points of view here - I'm not trying to be difficult.

 

 

 

 

Edited July 7, 2021 by DrBloodmoney

[pinkrobot_pb]

14 minutes ago, DeepEyes7 said:

 

I dont think so, to have your profile tracked here you need to manually update the profile here, so aside from an occasional player that stumble on this site and wanted to see how he was doing with his trophies, or the friend that wanted to see how many trophies had his other friend that doesnt care about trophies was doing, I dont see how will the profile of 80% of people that doesnt care about trophies will be updated here?

 

In the other hand, the rarity of trophies is calculated with the people that have the game in his profile (I don't know if it need to have at least one trophy unlocked or just to appear in his profile is enough) so even if people upload alts here the only way for it to count and increase the rarity of his trophies could be making hundreds of accounts with the game trophy list loaded... And even if somebody do that it only works with games with very little amount of owners to even faze it with alt accounts...

 

You would be right if this site was opt-in, but it is not. You can add any profile you want yourself on the homepage of this website.

 

The proof is in the pudding. You just have to go through the leaderboards yourself to see what happened as a result. The turnover point is around the 19.000-20.000th page. After that, there are about 60.000 more pages of people that are very obviously not trophy hunters. If they were at some point, it was maybe for a few days.

 

All those profiles and stats are meaningless and should be purged. You also seem to think that a couple of people would be doing this, but it's a well-known practice. I challenge you to boot up any old PS3 game that has leaderboards that you can browse, you will find out that many of those players have been added here by someone at some point. Sometimes out of sheer curiosity, I have done that myself too.

 

(By the way, you need to have at least 1 trophy unlocked because 0% games are not used for the stats.)

 

I argue that having all these meaningless profiles bloating the stats actually increases the perceived difference between "good" and "bad" games in this discussion. Because only trophy hunters/whores are buying Breakthrough games, while a LOT of non-trophy hunters play the actually good games, pushing their rarity down. And like I said, many of them are counted in the stats when they obviously should not be if you want to only compare trophy hunters.

Edited July 7, 2021 by pinkrobot_pb

[agorazUHD]

43 minutes ago, dmland12 said:

Are we having forbidden discussions here?  OK, sure.

 

I'll never understand the opposition to additional leaderboards as long as there's some support among users for them.  If you prefer the original, it's still there.  Why does there have to be only one leaderboard?  I don't get it.

 

That was my point. There are different ways to make leaderboards happen. The numbers are there whether through a website such as this, or even through PSN itself.

 

Why couldn't it happen? Overall, rarity, system specific, genre specific, etc.

 

EDIT: There are filters for system specific on the current board so that could be a filter of sorts for additional.

Edited July 7, 2021 by agorazUHD

[Walt the Dog]

14 minutes ago, pinkrobot_pb said:

(By the way, you need to have at least 1 trophy unlocked because 0% games are not used for the stats.)

Slight correction here: that's only the case for DLC trophies since they count owners as anyone who has at least one trophy in the corresponding DLC pack. For base lists, profiles at 0% count towards statistics; the only caveat is that they don't show up on the game leaderboard. This is how games like Aab's Animals, Sly 1, various Neptunia games, etc all tend to not have any trophies at 100% even though by the very nature of their lists, there's one single trophy that will always be someone's first regardless of how they play, usually because it's just for starting the game. This is also how you get odd lists like the PS3/PS4 Singstar games, FreeRealms, and Fortnite that are all flooded with high-rarity trophies since earning trophies requires some kind of in-game purchase like a subscription or, in Singstar's case, any 10 songs, but there are plenty of people who just play free components of the game or at least don't purchase what they'd need to actually earn trophies.

Edited July 7, 2021 by Walt the Dog

[DeepEyes7]

3 minutes ago, pinkrobot_pb said:

You would be right if this site was opt-in, but it is not. You can add any profile you want yourself on the homepage of this website. You just have to go through the leaderboards yourself to see what happened as a result. The turnover point is around the 19.000-20.000th page. After that, there are about 60.000 more pages of people that are very obviously not trophy hunters. If they were at some point, it was maybe for a few days.

 

Around page 40.000 there is people with average 350 trophies, not too much but I see your point.

 

Still, the limits used to define which trophy rarity is Ultra Rare, Rare, Common, Uncommon seems to be something defined by this site since I see some differences from the limits used by PSN (As example a trophy with 14.5% rarity is Very Rare on PSN but a trophy with 12.27% rarity is just Rare on PSNP), and in another sites like TrophyLeaders they use the system of Prestige, Ultra Rare... with their own limits. Thats why people doesnt use PSN rarities because since the pool of people owning the game is so huge everything has very little rarities, in that case the site surely wont use 5% as limit to Ultra Rares but 2% or whatever they want, my point is that even if 80% of profiles here doesnt care about trophies the limits to decide what is UR will be adjusted eventually or already be adjusted so saying that a trophy is UR because there is too much profiles updated here that doesnt care about trophies doesnt seem to accurate for me.