deleted

[DeepEyes7]

On 9/8/2022 at 1:40 PM, tonkie18 said:

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

 

That's the point, to weed out the fake URs... Not everyone will go for the plat of Crypt of the Necrodancer to make it common one ?

[AJ_-_808]

On 8/16/2022 at 7:06 AM, Mellenthin said:

 

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.

 

The current leaderboard is only prevalent now because when it was created, Sony actually had some quality control on what gets platinum.  Nobody could forsee the garbage dump the system would turn into.

 

The only reason an actual rarity board hasn't been implemented is because this site hasn't gotten any real updates (besides ps5) in years.

[AJ_Radio]

On 8/17/2022 at 9:56 PM, AJ_-_808 said:

 

The current leaderboard is only prevalent now because when it was created, Sony actually had some quality control on what gets platinum.  Nobody could forsee the garbage dump the system would turn into.

 

The only reason an actual rarity board hasn't been implemented is because this site hasn't gotten any real updates (besides ps5) in years.

The oldest posts on this website date back to 2011 so I assume that’s when PSNProfiles was new. Can always check on the Wayback Machine if there are even archives that exist in the virtual realm. 
 

The leaderboards turned into a dump starting in 2016 - 2017, when we started getting shit like Orc Slayer and Energy Cycle with regional stacks. Fast forward to now in 2022, roughly 75 - 90 percent of all new games is EZPZ trash that can be finished in five minutes. 
 

It’s absolutely amazing to see the difference of opinion between users who joined back in 2011 - 2013, and users who joined up in the last couple years. I’m making a rash generalization here, but it’s pretty telling when older users had to jump thru more hoops back around a decade ago because the trophy standards were far more strict (PSN games were mostly 100% only titles). Whereas the newer users competing for leaderboards are just buying up as many stacks as they can find, which basically trivializes the hobby of trophy hunting. 
 

@Unknown_v2_0 saw what was going on and decided to quit. It’s essentially a rat race and if you just play actual games, you have no chance to compete on the leaderboards. So they may as well be dead to me. 

[Vault-TecPhantom]

This subject always comes up and I used to be on the, 'there should be a rarity leaderboard!' side, but over time I've come to see how that mentality isn't as smart as it appears.

This is mainly because a trophy's rarity is not solely based on its difficulty or time, but just how much its fanbase love the game enough to spend more time with it. That's why the Fromsoft games have surprisingly high completion rates - the fans know what they're getting into.

 

Then on the other end of the spectrum, the Mass Effect Andromeda platinum has a rarity of just 5.44% despite being very easy and it's obvious why - most ME fans hate it (they're wrong because it's great but I digress).  Anthem and Fallout 76 - two games I also like - are even easier but their plat percentages are just under 6% because most people don't. Hell, I even saw co-op gaming sessions being made for Anthem - not to get trophies - but to just play with others to alleviate the boredom lol 

 

So how rare a trophy is doesn't really say anything about its alleged difficulty. All it shows is how much effort people are willing to put into a game they enjoy. 

 

Also, just because a platinum is common doesn't mean it's trash... Life is Strange 1 is one of my favourite games of all time and it has a high plat percentage. Are we to penalise  folks for playing games they enjoy simply because the trophies attached just so happen to be easy to get?  Come on now.

 

 

[MonaSaxPayne]

current leaderboard was ALWAYS based on points

 

top of the leaderboard, from inception to eternity, will always revolve around who can get the most points the fastest

 

this is a no brainer

 

not sure how the leaderboards have somehow become "tainted' when it is operating exactly how it was designed to 

 

points have nothing to do with rarity/skill/difficulty/enjoyment/quality

[DeepEyes7]

46 minutes ago, Vault-TecPhantom said:

This subject always comes up and I used to be on the, 'there should be a rarity leaderboard!' side, but over time I've come to see how that mentality isn't as smart as it appears.

This is mainly because a trophy's rarity is not solely based on its difficulty or time, but just how much its fanbase love the game enough to spend more time with it. That's why the Fromsoft games have surprisingly high completion rates - the fans know what they're getting into.

 

Then on the other end of the spectrum, the Mass Effect Andromeda platinum has a rarity of just 5.44% despite being very easy and it's obvious why - most ME fans hate it (they're wrong because it's great but I digress).  Anthem and Fallout 76 - two games I also like - are even easier but their plat percentages are just under 6% because most people don't. Hell, I even saw co-op gaming sessions being made for Anthem - not to get trophies - but to just play with others to alleviate the boredom lol 

 

So how rare a trophy is doesn't really say anything about its alleged difficulty. All it shows is how much effort people are willing to put into a game they enjoy. 

 

Also, just because a platinum is common doesn't mean it's trash... Life is Strange 1 is one of my favourite games of all time and it has a high plat percentage. Are we to penalise  folks for playing games they enjoy simply because the trophies attached just so happen to be easy to get?  Come on now.

 

 

 

Man, I agree with what you said, but the problem with the ezpz plats is the sheer quantity that we have, some easy games has low plat rarities, I agree, but how many of them do we have? 10? 20? 50? And we have some niche hard games with high plat rarity that they don't deserve, but again, how many are them? 10? 50?.... Doing a simple research here I checked how many plats have a 90%+ rarity?.... 1350 plats.... Man, that's too much... 95% of those games probably are under 30 mins plats before someone tell me "Man, this game is so good and took me 10 hours to plat and the rarity is 92% so your statement is invalid"... (2450 plats at 80%+... holy s....)

 

[AJ_-_808]

1 hour ago, Vault-TecPhantom said:

 

 

So how rare a trophy is doesn't really say anything about its alleged difficulty.

 

 

 

Rarity, by definition, does not equate to difficulty.

 

 

1 hour ago, MonaSaxPayne said:

 

not sure how the leaderboards have somehow become "tainted' when it is operating exactly how it was designed to 

 

Correct, it's operating as designed.  The design however, is outdated due to the change in platinum parameters.

 

Essentially, the spirit of the leaderboard is broken.  Although, I'm not sure that argument works either because prior to this was Rat games, and prior to that, the people at the top were just speed running visual novels.

 

 

[steel6burgh]

2 hours ago, AJ_Radio said:

The oldest posts on this website date back to 2011 so I assume that’s when PSNProfiles was new. Can always check on the Wayback Machine if there are even archives that exist in the virtual realm. 
 

The leaderboards turned into a dump starting in 2016 - 2017, when we started getting shit like Orc Slayer and Energy Cycle with regional stacks. Fast forward to now in 2022, roughly 75 - 90 percent of all new games is EZPZ trash that can be finished in five minutes. 
 

It’s absolutely amazing to see the difference of opinion between users who joined back in 2011 - 2013, and users who joined up in the last couple years. I’m making a rash generalization here, but it’s pretty telling when older users had to jump thru more hoops back around a decade ago because the trophy standards were far more strict (PSN games were mostly 100% only titles). Whereas the newer users competing for leaderboards are just buying up as many stacks as they can find, which basically trivializes the hobby of trophy hunting. 
 

@Unknown_v2_0 saw what was going on and decided to quit. It’s essentially a rat race and if you just play actual games, you have no chance to compete on the leaderboards. So they may as well be dead to me. 

Well we have an option what games we play.  I've been one of the biggest supporters of a leaderboard overhaul or addition.  some people agree and some don't but I will say These shit games haven't ruined trophy hunting for me.  It hasn't trivialized it either because if i want to challenge myself I still can.  I enjoy this hobby quite a bit and why I think anything we can do to appease more people and make the hobby more competitive and less participation reward type mentality I'm all for it.  However, either way it's not going to ruin the hobby.  The hobby is what you make it. This "back in the day" mentality doesn't impress me either.  If people want to challenge theirselves in the year 2022 they can still find plenty of games to give it to them.  It's all what we make of it.  The people going after the 99.9% trophies are really only wasting their own time it's not waisting mine.   

Edited August 20, 2022 by steel6burgh

[Datboy1991]

This is even worse that what we have now. A trophy on a game with 100,000 owners and 5% rarity will have 5000 achievers, more than a trophy on a game with 5000 owners and a rarity of 99%. Any possible solution is going to be controversial and have drawbacks, but this seems like a non-starter to me. Popular games like the Last of Us and GTA4 will have their plat's point value completely ruined. 

[AJ_Radio]

2 hours ago, steel6burgh said:

Well we have an option what games we play.  I've been one of the biggest supporters of a leaderboard overhaul or addition.  some people agree and some don't but I will say These shit games haven't ruined trophy hunting for me.  It hasn't trivialized it either because if i want to challenge myself I still can.  I enjoy this hobby quite a bit and why I think anything we can do to appease more people and make the hobby more competitive and less participation reward type mentality I'm all for it.  However, either way it's not going to ruin the hobby.  The hobby is what you make it. This "back in the day" mentality doesn't impress me either.  If people want to challenge theirselves in the year 2022 they can still find plenty of games to give it to them.  It's all what we make of it.  The people going after the 99.9% trophies are really only wasting their own time it's not waisting mine.   

I don’t see what you’re getting at here, unless you’re simply saying that I need more clarification.

[steel6burgh]

9 minutes ago, AJ_Radio said:

I don’t see what you’re getting at here, unless you’re simply saying that I need more clarification.

Yeah i'm just making a general statement.  I guess i'm saying the Shovelware generation of gamers are ruining the leaderboards but not the hobby because the hobby is what you personally make of it.  The leaderboards always were kind of meaningless.  

[Darling Baphomet]

We're never going to achieve any sort of perfect accuracy where rarity = effort; there'll always be anime games that take hundreds of hours for a 30-40% platinum and indie games that are 5% because nobody could be bothered to finish them. Them's the breaks. Gaming habits are too complicated to be measured on a graph.

With that said, OP, your idea is terrible. The only thing it's an "absolute" measure of is a game's popularity. If spammers were going to be an issue, they would have been already; TrueTrophies has had rarity based leaderboards for years, which has become something of a gold standard to the point of multiple events on this site even using their formula.

 

7 hours ago, AJ_Radio said:

The leaderboards turned into a dump starting in 2016 - 2017, when we started getting shit like Orc Slayer and Energy Cycle with regional stacks. Fast forward to now in 2022, roughly 75 - 90 percent of all new games is EZPZ trash that can be finished in five minutes.

 

Yep, I registered around late 2016 or 2017 and I still remember people using LEGO games and Telltale stacks as the mark of an effortless trophy list. [Insert "if only you knew how bad things really are" meme]

 

 

[AJ_Radio]

12 minutes ago, Darling Baphomet said:

Yep, I registered around late 2016 or 2017 and I still remember people using LEGO games and Telltale stacks as the mark of an effortless trophy list. [Insert "if only you knew how bad things really are" meme]

 

Notice how nobody criticizes those games anymore.

[Darling Baphomet]

2 minutes ago, AJ_Radio said:

Notice how nobody criticizes those games anymore.

 

Yeah I almost brought that up myself; it's like a trophy hunting Overton window. New levels of awful materialize and suddenly the old seems almost pleasant in comparison.

[AJ_Radio]

4 minutes ago, Darling Baphomet said:

 

Yeah I almost brought that up myself; it's like a trophy hunting Overton window. New levels of awful materialize and suddenly the old seems almost pleasant in comparison.

 

Which goes back to Terminator Salvation and Hannah Montana: The Game now being considered good, decent games.

[Darling Baphomet]

4 minutes ago, AJ_Radio said:

 

Which goes back to Terminator Salvation and Hannah Montana: The Game now being considered good, decent games.

 

I can't lie, I've thought of jokingly platinuming one of those horse girl simulators. But I try to moderate how many easy plat games I play and I already have way too many actual good ones on my backlog.

[Salamandxrs]

It might song stupid or already said before but why not a system like this : Trophy earned by 100% players is 0 points and by 0.1 is 99.99 points ?

[Darling Baphomet]

27 minutes ago, Salamandxrs said:

It might song stupid or already said before but why not a system like this : Trophy earned by 100% players is 0 points and by 0.1 is 99.99 points ?

 

Difficulty of games scales exponentially, not linearly. E.g. a 90% game would be 10 points, but most only take an hour or two to complete, while a .1% game would likely either be extremely difficult or take hundreds of hours to complete, but not even give you 10x as many points. 

[Ich1994-1994]

I guess you could instead multiply the trophypoints by average h to platinum but I am afraid there is a ton of games were it’s not so clear how many hours it takes to finish.

13 minutes ago, Darling Baphomet said:

 

Difficulty of games scales exponentially, not linearly. E.g. a 90% game would be 10 points, but most only take an hour or two to complete, while a .1% game would likely either be extremely difficult or take hundreds of hours to complete, but not even give you 10x as many points. 

That can be fixed by simply scaling is up to 0.1% gives 999 points and 99% gives 1 or any other scale you like

[MonaSaxPayne]

6 hours ago, AJ_-_808 said:

Correct, it's operating as designed.  The design however, is outdated due to the change in platinum parameters.

 

Essentially, the spirit of the leaderboard is broken.  Although, I'm not sure that argument works either because prior to this was Rat games, and prior to that, the people at the top were just speed running visual novels.

 

but the platinum parameters never changed either. plat = earn every other trophy on the list

 

as @steel6burgh said, leaderboard ranking has nothing to do with trophy hunting as a hobby u enjoy. u can still play what u want. before the influx of ezpz 1 min spam plats, 99.9% of trophy hunters weren't anywhere close to the top of the leaderboards anyway

[Vault-TecPhantom]

6 hours ago, Darling Baphomet said:

Yep, I registered around late 2016 or 2017 and I still remember people using LEGO games and Telltale stacks as the mark of an effortless trophy list. [Insert "if only you knew how bad things really are" meme]

 

 

 

But the Lego and Telltales games are actually fun... That's why they've gained a good reputation through time, not because by comparison "it could be worse". There's a reason why the Skywalker Saga is the best selling in the series - it goes beyond the trophy hunting community now. Tales from the Borderlands is better than some of the actual Borderlands games imo! 

This is a prime example of what I talked about in the last sentence of my previous post - shaming people for genuinely liking games that just so happen to be "easy" (and difficulty is subjective anyway).

[janzor88]

5 hours ago, MonaSaxPayne said:

 

but the platinum parameters never changed either. plat = earn every other trophy on the list

 

as @steel6burgh said, leaderboard ranking has nothing to do with trophy hunting as a hobby u enjoy. u can still play what u want. before the influx of ezpz 1 min spam plats, 99.9% of trophy hunters weren't anywhere close to the top of the leaderboards anyway

 

Games being able to have a platinum trophy did indeed change, so AJ 808s post makes complete sense.

 

If you had a small arcade'ish game, it could only contain 315 points trophy wise and have no platinum trophy.

The leaderboards are completely inflated because we have +1000 shovelware shit "games".

 

It's not really rocket science or hard to understand that the times have changed since the leaderboard was made, and that the leaderboard hasn't followed with the times.

I have no idea why you keep returning to every single thread about rarity or ezpz games, and whine about people who are trying to improve the site.

You are not to decide what matters to people.

If you don't give a shit about leaderboards, then don't berate other people who do care.

[tonkie18]

On 16/08/2022 at 6:39 PM, DeepEyes7 said:

 

That's the point, to weed out the fake URs... Not everyone will go for the plat of Crypt of the Necrodancer to make it common one 

Right there might be the odd game that would still have ultra rare trophies to begin with anyway. But games which aren’t as hard as that will be completed more and become less rare. So then everyone with a hard on for this ultra rare leaderboard will start chasing the harder ultra rares and they will become less rare until every trophy is common.

 

 So basically everyone whining about this would have to complete crypt of the necrodancer or the like to stay on this rarity leaderboard? Everything would become less rare with time. Makes no sense to me.

 

You say fake UR’s as if anything that isn’t as hard as Crypt shouldn’t be one. There are plenty of games that need patience, time, effort but might not necessarily require a lot of skill.. so they shouldn’t be classed as an UR? I think what you’re after is some sort of leaderboard which shows off skill - basically a badge of honour, look at me and how good I am at gaming. I’m not sure how you will measure that but good luck!

[sweeping-lamp3]

6 hours ago, Darling Baphomet said:

 

Difficulty of games scales exponentially, not linearly. E.g. a 90% game would be 10 points, but most only take an hour or two to complete, while a .1% game would likely either be extremely difficult or take hundreds of hours to complete, but not even give you 10x as many points. 

 

I think that's what PSN100 tried to do with its rarity leaderboard.

However, the site might be broken right now or I'm not understanding it correctly.

 

 

 

[AJ_-_808]

6 hours ago, MonaSaxPayne said:

 

but the platinum parameters never changed either. plat = earn every other trophy on the list

 

In the original set up, (if I'm not mistaken) only disc released games had a platinum.  While this was also flawed and did lead to cases of minimal effort disc games having a platinum vs high effort digital games not having one, it wasn't nearly as prolific.  We didn't have 5+ stacks of 2 or 3 minimal effort games releasing on disc every week (because it's not a feasible business model), like we have with the digital titles now.

 

Sony basically went from one end of the spectrum to the other, and the original intent of the leaderboard got lost in the process.