deleted

[HellMoodCole]

deleted

Edited April 2 by HellMoodCole

[WiktorM101]

 

13 minutes ago, BigBossImBeamer said:

Is that so much more absurd than playing Jumping Pile of Poo Turbo?

 

You can provide examples. Even with your best case scenario of recently new game with 0 players we can easly see that they are 85~90+% after few days.

There are too many active individuals playing for this to be a thing.

 

I will give an example tho. https://psnprofiles.com/trophies/17403-round-invaders (31 achievers atm)

For this new game to have plat around 20% there would have to be 124 alts in this moment. And trophies started syncing TODAY. Like this is seriously not a thing. This is your best case scenario and tommorow it will need exponentially more alts for this to change statistics in a way this would matter.

 

And you still skipping AAA games problem becouse as far as i'm aware there in not even one AAA that would give much points. Not even comparable to Jumping Nuggets (jumping nuggets need 1279 alts to be at 30% plat btw)

[MonaSaxPayne]

personally don't care for a rarity leaderboard, but I like @Jerry_Appleby's formula suggestion!

[HellMoodCole]

deleted

Edited April 2 by HellMoodCole

[ScintillaWolf]

2 hours ago, sephiroth4424 said:

Unpopular opinion: 

 

Common trophies give zero points

 

We all have them, no need for ribbons and other things. Just leaderboards where 50+% trophies don't give points

 

I'd definitely be in approval of this. I'm convinced that would absolutely destroy the appeal of shovelware games if they held no value whatsoever. I've a few games on my list with basically all common trophies, and I'd happily have them not attribute to my position in any such leaderboard, as I played those because I liked the look of them, not for a quick leaderboard jump. As it should be.

 

Edit: The suggestion put forward by @Jerry_Appleby is also a great idea!

Edited August 9, 2022 by ScintillaWolf

[Sunny]

Don't care much for it, but there's so good ideas here, too bad it will never come into fruition like the other 500 threads created before this one since the top dog doesn't give two tits and a gravey about the website, hope Husky can make some improvements but even with his goodwill and skill there's a limit to what he can do alone.

[WiktorM101]

1 hour ago, BigBossImBeamer said:

A rarity leaderboard would be ignored anyway, if it only existed beside the real leaderboard. But if it would replace the real one, there would be no motivation to play shovelware games without spam accounts.

1. There was never motivation to play shovelware with alts and will never be no matter which leaderboard we use

2. Oh there still would be motivation to play shovelware. At least in your model of Leaderboard shovelware is still better then actual hard games. 

 

If you gonna bring up Pros/Cons here let me fix it for you

 

Quote

Absolute rarity leaderboard

 

Most rational approach:

 

• play the hardest game that matches your skills next Not true (shovelware is still better)

 

Pros:

 

• skill required Not true
• DLC owners not relevant They are super relevant now. Even more then before as there are always less DLC owners then game owners (and DLC trophies tend to have way less achivers then main game) look at Hitman, Train Sim World series or any regular game with PSNP+ feature "Global DLC rarities" toggled on
• highest possible objectivity Not true in system where Jumping Nuggets > Super Meat Boy point wise isn't it?

 

Cons:

 

• popularity has negative impact on points Well that's true

To be honest Pros/cons of Current Leaderboard are right and Relative rarity leaderboard minus the manipulating part is correct too.

 

Okay i think i said everything i wanted. This discussion should've ended some time ago.

Edited August 9, 2022 by WiktorM101

[NathanielJohn]

2 hours ago, Jerry_Appleby said:

What I mean to say is take whatever the rarity of your trophy is (call it "x"), and divide from 100. So your rarity score would be 100/x. 

 

For anyone who wants to go down the Rarity Leaderboard rabbit hole, this is exactly the formula that I have been advocating for for over 5 years now:

 

[Xylobe]

What I've never been able to understand about the "rarity leaderboard" discussion is what exactly the purpose would be. On the current leaderboard, the person at the top is the one with the most trophy points; the numbers might be arbitrary, but at least they're coming from the people who made the trophy system in the first place. When it comes to the formulas people have suggested - even the simple ones like 50/rarity - what would your leaderboard placement actually mean? I could at least understand it if it were something like "total number of Ultra Rares", or some function of average rarity and total trophies, but when the discussion turns to seemingly-random formulas and "total trophy points except for these ones which shouldn't count" then it starts to feel like we may as well be ranking people based on how many of their trophies start with the letter R.

[Jerry_Appleby]

1 hour ago, MonaSaxPayne said:

personally don't care for a rarity leaderboard, but I like @Jerry_Appleby's formula suggestion!

I think this is literally the only thing we have in common outside of our birthdays being on the same day ?

 

35 minutes ago, NathanielJohn said:

 

For anyone who wants to go down the Rarity Leaderboard rabbit hole, this is exactly the formula that I have been advocating for for over 5 years now:

 

Damn I thought I was being unique with my suggestion! I've had that idea floating around in my head for a couple years now, not realizing that you came up with the exact same idea a few years prior to my own.  I guess that's what happens when I've been sticking with PST for the last 8 years and only just started using the forums here this year! But yeah, our ideas are basically the same! The only difference was with mine using 100 so that common trophies can count as well, but only as a single point, whereas yours is eliminating all common trophies.

 

Both are super easy to explain and to implement, and they make sense.

[janzor88]

18 minutes ago, Xylobe said:

What I've never been able to understand about the "rarity leaderboard" discussion is what exactly the purpose would be. On the current leaderboard, the person at the top is the one with the most trophy points; the numbers might be arbitrary, but at least they're coming from the people who made the trophy system in the first place. When it comes to the formulas people have suggested - even the simple ones like 50/rarity - what would your leaderboard placement actually mean? I could at least understand it if it were something like "total number of Ultra Rares", or some function of average rarity and total trophies, but when the discussion turns to seemingly-random formulas and "total trophy points except for these ones which shouldn't count" then it starts to feel like we may as well be ranking people based on how many of their trophies start with the letter R.

 

When the leaderboard were created, we didn't have enormous amounts of click 1 button games.

Back when we started, it was both about time and skill.

After the shovelware flooding, the skill is completely out of the equation.

The leaderboard is horrendously inflated because of this, and has not kept up with the times.

 

This in turn gives unnecessary incentive for some people to keep buying these shit releases, which in turn make "developers" keep sending out their copy/paste garbage.

Why tryhard and put effort into the competitive part of our hobby, when you can get hundreds of platinums each month by just clicking a single button? 

Edited August 9, 2022 by janzor88
typo

[AJ_Radio]

I basically already said my piece on the ‘other’ thread regarding shovelware titles. 
 

My own suggestions is applying a filter on the ‘Games’ section on this website, and implementing a leaderboard of sorts that doesn’t reward 5 minute platinums so easily. 
 

Sony doesn’t care since we’re a small minority amongst the tens of millions of people who game in their PS4s and PS5s. 
 

We can however, do something for this website, which is what we should be striving for in this community.

[MonaSaxPayne]

2 hours ago, janzor88 said:

 

When the leaderboard were created, we didn't have enormous amounts of click 1 button games.

Back when we started, it was both about time and skill.

After the shovelware flooding, the skill is completely out of the equation.

The leaderboard is horrendously inflated because of this, and has not kept up with the times.

 

This in turn gives unnecessary incentive for some people to keep buying these shit releases, which in turn make "developers" keep sending out their copy/paste garbage.

Why tryhard and put effort into the competitive part of our hobby, when you can get hundreds of platinums each month by just clicking a single button? 

 

I disagree with this synopsis

 

leaderboards have ALWAYS been about who has the most time and money to play games. otherwise we would've all been Hakoom. 

 

easy trophy games have existed since inception: frogger, spare parts, Hannah Montana, terminator salvation, megamind, detuned, linger in shadows, magus, countless VNs and Disney games etc.  granted, they were not as prolific as the huge influx of $2/1 minute plats like we have now. but the basic principle never changed

 

trophies have been around now for 14 years. its obvious that back in the day a profile that had, say 50 plats, was really impressive. even without all these newer spam games, do u really think 50 plats in 2022 would have the same amount of prestige? no. a lot of time has passed. once about a time 100 platinums used to be a rare sight. now its the norm

 

if u are a competitive person, u do what u have to do to stay on top. 99% of the ppl who whine about spam games aren't anywhere close to being on the top of the leaderboards anyway, and thats even without the spam games. why can't ppl just concentrate on their own profile/games and stop grieving over what other ppl play?

 

 

 

 

[AJ_-_808]

44 minutes ago, MonaSaxPayne said:

 

easy trophy games have existed since inception: frogger, spare parts, Hannah Montana, terminator salvation, megamind, detuned, linger in shadows, magus, countless VNs and Disney games etc.  granted, they were not as prolific as the huge influx of $2/1 minute plats like we have now. but the basic principle never changed

 

It would be disingenuous to compare the above easy trophy games, including VNs, to the press X for platinum stuff coming out now

 

While many people turned VNs into "press X for plat", at least they were designed to actually be a story 

 

Excluding VNs, the old "easy plat games" were generally few and far in between and actually required (small) effort.  The ones coming out now are copy/paste + stacks deliberately made to take advantage of people's trophy addiction 

[MonaSaxPayne]

9 minutes ago, AJ_-_808 said:

 

It would be disingenuous to compare the above easy trophy games, including VNs, to the press X for platinum stuff coming out now

 

While many people turned VNs into "press X for plat", at least they were designed to actually be a story 

 

Excluding VNs, the old "easy plat games" were generally few and far in between and actually required (small) effort.  The ones coming out now are copy/paste + stacks deliberately made to take advantage of people's trophy addiction 

 

I wasn't insinuating that

 

I'm saying that easy games always existed.. and easy games have always been fodder to shoot to the top of the leaderboard

 

I don't know how long you've been trophy hunting (I didn't peep ur profile) but trust me when I tell u even back then ppl were shamed for playing piles of Disney games, VNs and stuff like Hannah Montana etc

 

just ask @Darth_Krid ?

 

I've personally never understood why ppl get their panties in a bunch over what other ppl choose to play

 

like mind your own business already

 

[sepheroithisgod]

This would not work because of how niche some games are due to low player count. For instance, look at most JP or As versions of games on this site. They typically only have a few hundred achievers at most. I also believe DLC trophies would become insanely valuable as not everyone buys every DLC. It's common for a DLC to only have less than a thousand buyers on this site.

It's also worth pointing out that some EZPZ games would still be worth more than normal games because of the lower player count.

 

I think relative is the best option because your main argument is looking at it from the extreme side. While titles with very few players can be manipulated with dummy accounts, I think you are underestimating how many accounts it would take to move some games. And even more importantly, how many people would even attempt to do that kind of behavior?

My gut says not many. And it would be something the CTR team could pick up on if a bunch of accounts just happen to only have a few choice games with 1 trophy earned.

 

I'd just like to see a rarity leaderboard or any kind at this point. Please @Sly Ripper

[Xillynoc]

How about no leaderboard at all so people stop waving the PSN equivalent of reddit karma around like it means something and go back to focusing on having fun with video games

[MonaSaxPayne]

31 minutes ago, sepheroithisgod said:

And it would be something the CTR team could pick up on if a bunch of accounts just happen to only have a few choice games with 1 trophy earned.

 

I for one hope the CTR have better things to do than to check profiles for possible "dummy account padding" 

 

imagine being flagged because u only have 1 trophy in a game

[DeepEyes7]

1 hour ago, MonaSaxPayne said:

if u are a competitive person, u do what u have to do to stay on top. 

 

 

Some people that used to have a good standing in the global LB or at least in their countries LB had to deal with "play crap to stay in the top", some of them did that but some others couldn't deal with flooding their profiles with hundreds of this stacks even if they had the plat of Hannah Montana or Terminator Salvation... Those people are the most salty with all this ezpz plats thing... 

[AJ_-_808]

2 hours ago, MonaSaxPayne said:

 

I don't know how long you've been trophy hunting (I didn't peep ur profile) but trust me when I tell u even back then ppl were shamed for playing piles of Disney games, VNs and stuff like Hannah Montana etc

 

just ask @Darth_Krid 

 

I've personally never understood why ppl get their panties in a bunch over what other ppl choose to play

 

like mind your own business already

 

 

 

Long enough to see the nonsense over Aab's animals & Hannah Montana unfortunately (on my old account)

 

I agree with your point of people needing to mind their own business, to the extent that shaming someone for what they play is ridiculous. Unfortunately, the sheer quantity of these "games" (that, IMO, are preying on trophy/leaderboard addiction) plus their stacks spills over to other parts if the website and affects people that would otherwise not care.

 

Leaderboard fodder went from a light rain shower to Noah's Ark 40 days of flooding 

[KennethMcCormick]

An absolute rarity leaderboard would make everything worse. How about an absolute relativity leaderboard instead? Just give every single profile the number one spot, with an option to manually edit one’s rankings. I’d bet we’d see a lot of 420 rank world wide and 69 in country...

[Rally-Vincent---]

On 9.8.2022 at 3:51 PM, Silver-I-Chariot said:

Rarity rankings work well on psntrophyleaders (although their site has other issues). They don't award points for common trophies at all, which means spam games don't count. And looking at my own profile I think it's fairly accurate - my easy games are barely worth any points, my games that I worked hard to complete are worth a lot, so idk, whatever you thins is the problem it just works.

 

Sorry, but I think the rarity leaderboard over there is ridiculous. I have 800.000 "points", and 1/4 of those points come from 20 trophies. That board is unfairly biased towards sub-1% trophies to cater the needs of a certain group of players.

[djb5f]

13 minutes ago, Rally-Vincent--- said:

 

Sorry, but I think the rarity leaderboard over there is ridiculous. I have 800.000 "points", and 1/4 of those points come from 20 trophies. That board is unfairly biased towards sub-1% trophies to cater the needs of a certain group of players.

you can always make the formula here be a little less steep (but the super ultra rare’s still need to carry the weight or it won’t really be a rarity leaderboard)

[Rozalia1]

Set an arbitrary amount of trophies needed to get on the leaderboard, 10,000 for example (to avoid people doing one tough game and then trolling at the top), and then go by the already tracked average rarity. If two people have the same % then whoever has the most overall points comes first.

 

That would I think be the least abusable rarity leaderboard type I'd think.

[Mellenthin]

On 09/08/2022 at 8:40 PM, tonkie18 said:

Then people would go for rare/ultra and they would become common too ?‍♀️? 

 

Are you talking from experience or just guessing??

 

There's probably some truth to that people in general seek out easier ultra-rares if that's their thing, just as people on top of the leaderboard purposely select the most absolute low-effort titles per cent spent.

 

The kicker is that everybody at the top has to resort to the latter in order to stay relevant, whereas low-effort ultra-rares doesn't help neither in that scenario or in any rarity leaderboard - unless perhaps you're a no-lifer that prefer spamming those before harder and more time-consuming games.

 

Anyway, my point is that you're more than welcome to prove your own theory right. Problem is, anybody with some heavy titles under their belt know that when you're finally done with such a game, you're often exhausted and in need of some recuperating.

 

The current leaderboard and a rarity counterpart is basically the opposite of eachother. And as such, there's a reason why the former is the prevalent and not the other.

Edited August 16, 2022 by Mellenthin