Jump to content

Account Ranking (Based on rarity Average)


Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, steel6burgh said:

do you really think people like jumping hotdog?  It takes 2 minutes to get the platinums are you trying to tell me that people play those games past that for their enjoyment?  I think you should try to evaluate the situation better instead of just worrying so much about being judged on PSN profiles.  Nobody knows who you are everyone knows you as your screen name and nothing more.  It's not about judgments it's about creating a proper leaderboard for everyone to enjoy so why not have two leaderboards one for rarity and one for quantity?  What about poor people who can afford to waste thousands of dollars on jumping hotdog games over the years to compete for the leeboard are you judging them because they don't have as many platinums as you?  It's not about judging it's about bettering the site!

But thats the thing 90% of this site doesnt care about people who play the trashy shovelware games that are a easy plat, the biggest annoyance with them is their hogging of the new games list. Why do you care so much about people buying trashy 2$ games for trophies? The "situation" of ezpz plats being a issue is just made up because people are insecure that people can get higher on a leaderboard that doesn't matter by spending money on easy games. If there was a leaderboard for rarity it would have the exact same problem as the normal one, getting rare trophies isint the most difficult thing in the world just go to any popular multiplayer game and get all the collectibles in the campaign thats usually enough for a ultra rare. 

 

The basic thing is if you add another leaderboard for rarity people will still complain about people buying 5$ unknown games for a "ezpz ultra rare platinum" its better to just ignore it as if this new leaderboard is added itll only cause more threads atune to "we need a leaderboard for actually hard ultra rares"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I think this kind of post is just bait, it's not possible for these people to think such a stupid thing for real wtf... just stop and think for 2 minutes before proposing something like that smh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, DrBloodmoney said:


This thread isn’t suggesting a Rarity Leaderboard - it’s suggesting a binary system, whereby profiles over a certain rarity are given a publicly visible Scarlet Letter, to make other people with lower average rarities feel better about themselves by comparison.

 


I have some rare games, and I have lots of incredibly not-rare games.
That’s what happens when you play what you want to play, and don’t give a good goddamn about the rarity of thier trophies.

 

If you and your rarity-fetish brethren find that so offensive that you want the site to “brand” my profile with your Red Mark of Shame, I don’t really give a toss…

…it won’t change the games I play - or have the (presumably intended) effect of making me feel bad about my choice of entertainment…

 

…but, I am a site user and a site supporter, and it certainly wouldn’t make me feel like the site had been made “better” by it.


Thank you for better explaining it :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

“Branding” someone isn’t going to accomplish anything except increase elitism and bickering from both sides of the divide. That isn’t “bettering” the site. That’s aside from the fact that you can usually take a quick scroll through a profile, color-coded or not, and know what’s up, if you care. What would be the actual point?

 

So far as other solutions, I don’t have any. A “rarity leaderboard” would be just as manipulated as the current one. Go find something that was offered on PS+ but wasn’t a stellar triple-A title, play it for an hour, pickup a few Ultra Rares. Easy. (For example: The Swindle’s “You’re A Mean One.” Some basic clock manipulation, and presto, a 2.32% trophy.) You can accomplish the same with free-to-play or VR titles (check the rarities on Borderlands 2 VR or Knights of Valor, for example.) Or picking the “right” stack of a game. Or, as others have noted, pick up something most people play for the multiplayer, then actually do the campaign. Sure, they take a little more homework and effort than pressing X for 3 minutes, but where there’s a will, there’s a way, and there is always the will to climb a leaderboard regardless of how pointless, not indicative of the actual skill supposedly being measured, or finessed it may be. All of that is aside from some trophies that most would likely consider “worthy” that are more common than you’d think, either due to popularity and FOMO or a niche fanbase; Demon’s Souls and Sekiro are both around 27%; Elden Ring is at 44%.

 

Actually, I have one simple solution: Let it be. People want to spend their cash to inflate imaginary numbers in some kind of race to the bottom? Let ‘em.

Edited by Ashande
Addendum regarding trophy rarity on Soulslikes
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, DrBloodmoney said:

clippy-first-assistant.jpg

 

The only measure of an account worth more than a warm bucket of spit, is whether the player enjoyed the games they played.

 

If someone plays games because they enjoy games, then that’s a good profile - and rarity has sweet fuck all to do with that.

 

Any other measurement is just theatre in the mind of the beholder.

I actually enjoyed space overlords.  Why are you being so judgmental?  I'm not in a safe place anymore.   

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, steel6burgh said:

I actually enjoyed space overlords.  Why are you being so judgmental?  I'm not in a safe place anymore.   

 

6 minutes ago, amurnin100 said:

I did too, apart from the grind…


Well… good? :dunno:

 

Someone had to, I suppose!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the most interesting stats available is on True Trophies filter leaderboard by True Trophy Score then Unique Games. It removes the stacks and gives you a true indication of ranking. Based on Rarity and only 1 stack of each game. I wouldn’t mind seeing that here of course I also wouldn’t mind a PS5 equivalent in performance  to the Xbox Series X ……….

Edited by AffectatiousDonk
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, AffectatiousDonk said:

One of the most interesting stats available is on True Trophies filter leaderboard by True Trophy Score then Unique Games. It removes the stacks and gives you a true indication of ranking. Based on Rarity and only 1 stack of each game. I wouldn’t mind seeing that here of course I also wouldn’t mind a PS5 equivalent in performance  to the Xbox Series X ……….

Wish I could log into true trophies I lost access to the email I used for that site and forgot my password.  I guess I signed up for it when I 1st started trophy hunting 6 years ago.  i guess there is no way to reset my account and start over.  Loosing both password and email i have no idea what to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Datboy1991 said:

A mathematically challenged person might think that correlation is an absolute and that not having 100% correlation means there is zero correlation, but of course you're not mathematically challenged so you would understand why this comment is, at best, misleading. 

 

I sneezed this morning and then rain started pouring this afternoon

 

they must be correlated!

Edited by MonaSaxPayne
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, MonaSaxPayne said:

 

I sneezed this morning and then rain started pouring this afternoon

 

my immune system must be correlated to weather patterns!

 

If you thought this was some sort of epic takedown or that you in any way helped your case here, then ohhhhhhh dear. 

 

Let's take your morning sneeze. First of all, bless you. If we wanted to see if there was a correlation or if this was just a coincidence, we would test this against other occurrences of you sneezing. There might be no correlation, a weak correlation, or a strong correlation. There are quantitative ways to measure this. It's not a dichotomy where two things either are or are not correlated: it's a spectrum. Evidence of correlation (or lack thereof) gets stronger with the sample size. A sample size of one is almost never strong enough to suggest a correlation. 

 

Your sarcasm is noted, but you really are missing the point. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Datboy1991 said:

There might be no correlation, a weak correlation, or a strong correlation. There are quantitative ways to measure this. It's not a dichotomy where two things either are or are not correlated: it's a spectrum. Evidence of correlation (or lack thereof) gets stronger with the sample size. A sample size of one is almost never strong enough to suggest a correlation. 

 

Your sarcasm is noted, but you really are missing the point. 

 

sarcasm aside.. I actually agree with everything u said here 

 

u can objectively measure rarity. its simply the number of people who played a game relative to the number of people who finished it

 

u can't objectively measure difficulty. but for arguments sake lets use the "objective" measure of the difficulty posted in the guide

 

I can't speak for other people, but thinking about it, I consider things correlated when they have a STRONG relationship to each other. otherwise technically "anything" could be deemed to be correlated, even if its a one off occurrence. as u mentioned... correlation exists on a spectrum

 

there are many instances where difficult games have a high rarity, difficult games have a low rarity, easy games have a high rarity, and easy games have a low rarity. 

 

as such, where is the STRONG correlation between difficulty and rarity?

 

maybe someone with obvious time on their hands, instead of trying to shame other ppl's profile, can instead plot a rarity vs difficulty curve, so we can conclusively determine just how correlated these 2 factors are. it would certainly make for better reading and discussion than these whiny gatekeeper, profile shaming topics that pop up all the time now

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/6/2022 at 8:42 AM, dzstrpc said:

What if someone has played the same games as you and earned the same trophies from them as you, but also played 500+ ezpzs?

 

Should your account be praised and theirs shamed?

 

Yes

 

Actually I don't get this at all.  The leaderboard is already there showing who has played the most trash on the top of the list.  Therefore all the typical trophy hunters would basically get their own list based on rarity of trophies collected.  It's not really shaming one, and praising the other.  It's more like showing a second list for different trophy hunters who don't buy trash games.

 

It actually seems pretty equal to me.

Edited by LegendExeter
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2022-08-08 at 4:55 AM, LegendExeter said:

It's not really shaming one, and praising the other.

Believe me, I'm all for a Rarity Leaderboard. The more statistics the better.

I even have an idea of a leaderboard that will always have the one with the most ultra rares at the top.

I'm hesitant about making a suggestion thread about it though, what's the point really, nothing changes around here.

 

What I reacted about in OPs post was his idea of colorcoding accounts, which to me is naming and shaming, and against site rules.

So I don't think his suggestion will lead to anything?!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, dzstrpc said:

Believe me, I'm all for a Rarity Leaderboard. The more statistics the better.

I even have an idea of a leaderboard that will always have the one with the most ultra rares at the top.

I'm hesitant about making a suggestion thread about it though, what's the point really, nothing changes around here.

 

What I reacted about in OPs post was his idea of colorcoding accounts, which to me is naming and shaming, and against site rules.

So I don't think his suggestion will lead to anything?!

 

Yeah it probably won't, I've seen no siginificant changes on this site in over a year, so I look at the Suggestions Section as more of a "dreamers" area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My problem with the leaderboards is, that accounts dont get removed, when more than 1 people working on an account.
Like games that are a 500 hours platinum and the 500 hours are played straight without sleeping time... nothing. This "groupe" has 21 days in a 500 hour platinum. GG. Nobody believes you play 21 days straight without sleeping, pausing and shitting (lol). This go even more crazy, when 2+ consoles was played at the same time. Like 4 people sitting on 6 consoles. This is not how leaderboards works. Sometimes i believe, they are some crazy dudes sitting in a big hall and have tons of games ready just to create an account, do everything is possible just for trolling us. If they get banned/removed, they create a new account and rise in the leaderboards again. Thanks god, i dont really care about my rank. For me just 100% my games are important. I dont do this for flexing or my p**** size. I dont do this for the GGs from the community. Its nice to get all the congratulatios, but more important is the fun while playing and find new friends.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I read some posts skimmed others skipped some entirely, too tired to read everything, but I do like the idea of an additional rarity Leaderboard and another one for removing stacks, but in addition to what we already have also in answer to some comments about ezpz games taking over, atm I'm working on PS3 games trying to get first on every Leaderboard for my country and working on PS3 first, anyway I'm starting off with easier games and one of the ways I've been doing that is looking at the percentage complete and for a the first few pages it makes sense in essence of easy games then you see something like Dark Soul's pop up with a higher completion rate than say Ben 10, I haven't played a souls game beyond about 10 minutes in Demons Souls but I do know that their bloody hard but people enjoy them alot hence the high completion rate, point is that this idea of the color coding wouldn't work not just because it's a form of discrimination against people who enjoy easy games but because it could target people who just enjoy popular games that have a high completion rate, in addition to that, the ezpz games can be alot of fun I have rather enjoyed the ones I've played so far, but I've also enjoyed everything else I've played, in response to Leaderboard positions I've noticed that most people only focus on either one or the other ezpz only or avoid them completely, while I do think people who stick to ezpz games are missing out on some other great games I think the people who don't play them are also missing out on some pretty fun games. At the end of everything we're gamers trophy hunters and people just let everyone enjoy what they do with no judgments. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Riku_Darkness said:

My problem with the leaderboards is, that accounts dont get removed, when more than 1 people working on an account.

There's no way to find out if an account is used by multiple people. Plus, who the fuck cares? The massive influx of shovelware has made trophies more worthless than they already have been. Play for fun and stop caring about things not worth wasting a thought about.

Videogames are meant to be fun, a means to kill time. Rankings on some private website, abandoned by its owner... Jesus, who cares?

Edited by R4M Razr
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/8/2022 at 5:25 AM, Datboy1991 said:

There's an element of frustration for sure. Every time this topic comes up in any form, it gets aggressively shouted down.

 

This is what I don't understand when it comes to this topic.  Clearly a decent percentage of the users of the site would like to see some kind of rarity-based leaderboard.  The reasons for this seem manifold - sense of competition, desire for challenge, the perception that the main leaderboard has become compromised due to the quantity of shovelware games, and undoubtedly some elitism.  None of these reasons should really matter though; such a leaderboard wouldn't (or at least shouldn't) have any impact on the current leaderboard, or people's profiles more generally.  So why oppose it so vehemently if you can simply choose to ignore it in the unlikely event it ever were implemented?

 

The arguments against it are very flimsy:

  • That rarity is not correlated with difficulty. (Difficulty is definitely one of the factors that impacts rarity, perhaps the second most important factor after length)
  •  That people will just abuse the system by playing old PSN+ games, games with tacked on MP, or VR titles. (OK... so let them?)
  • That people are taking trophies too seriously and the leaderboards are meaningless anyway.  (I happen to think this myself, but there are a significant number of people who like the competition and orderliness of leaderboards, so this is not a valid argument against it)
  • That it promotes elitism.  (So does any leaderboard)

 

There are obviously debates to be had regarding how to best implement it, what formula to use etc, and I personally don't like OP's suggestions, but the reasons provided against such a leaderboard in this thread are not at all compelling and seem to boil down to "I personally don't want or care about such a leaderboard, therefore it shouldn't be implemented".  I think the conversation is academic in any case, since it's unlikely to be implemented by the site admin and as far as I know Husky isn't interested either...

Edited by WakeUpHP
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...