Trophy Spam Issue

[PalaceOfLove706]

These clicker games have like 50-100 owners. Maybe a couple hundred when you include the stacks. This website has almost 500k members. There is no problem with the leaderboards. These games are hardly being played. It’s a joke saying the only way to rank up is to play these games. Barely anyone is playing them. 

[MMDE]

16 minutes ago, Darling Baphomet said:

 

A rarity formula akin to TrueTrophies' would be a good solution to this, IMO. Although you would likely have to make the leaderboard only count rarity points. As me and my team discovered during the 2020 Winter Tag Team event, even when you're playing cheesy URs you still can't keep up with the sheer volume of trophies achieved by stroker spam.

 

You could also discount 80%+ rarity platinums altogether, as it's around that cutoff point that games begin to be rather effortless. But there still needs to be some kind of sliding scale to keep up with the fact that certain games are easier to beat than others, otherwise the meta would simply move to 2-3 hour indie games instead of insta-win games.

 

A potentially easier idea than the aforementioned rarity scoring system would be assigning points for each trophy / platinum you earn, based on its rarity. E.g. ultra rare games give you ultra rare points, rares give you rare points, etc. Though even with this due to the considerable difference between opposing ends of a rarity category, it might be useful to have games with lower rarities award more of their respective category's points. E.g. a 5% trophy earns 1 UR point and a .5% earns... let's say 4 or 5.

 

Actually, I found a way to keep up with it before. Posted about it long ago, but it was meant for the rarity leaderboard, it doesn't work well for main leaderboard, unfortunately. As you say, if you ever do give points to commons it will almost always be more rewarding than the cost.

 

I just want to see the stacks above 80% go, maybe add some extra points to trophies based on rarity (like TT), and treat the asset swaps as stacks. The effect of this is massive.

 

 

Edited October 18, 2022 by MMDE

[GraniteBeast603]

2 minutes ago, MMDE said:

While I get your point, you're really just questioning the motivation for this change.

I think the motivation for calling for this change comes from a very toxic place of jealousy and resentment.

 

Quote

 

now everyone actually had to buy each of these to keep themselves at the top of the leaderboard.

 

Anyone wanting to compete had to buy all that stuff every time there was a new game, just to pop quick trophies,

 

these players need to buy their latest apps to keep their ranking.

No one had to buy anything they didn't want to. You really need to think on this deeply and try to see the contradiction in your thinking. "I must maintain my ranking by buying garbage" and "My ranking is meaningless because it's based on garbage" are not compatible thoughts. Pick one and stick with it please.

 

Quote

It's exploitative

No it's not! But let's pretend that it is. I'll just agree with you for the sake of argument on this. Let's say it is actually exploitative. Is this really a rabbit hole you want to go down? Do you know how many "exploitative" dynamics there are in virtually all video games today? Do you know how many games are programmed using the same algorithms as slot machines with the intention of maximizing the likelihood that you get addicted? Yet you're only laser-focused on this one thing. What's up with that?

Plus, do you know there is a super simple solution to exploitative practices? You can  just stop spending money on it.

 

Quote

it's flooding.

This I just don't understand. There are a billion-kajillion ways people get informed of new games. Everything is searchable by names, genres, and keywords. Are you really complaining that the store is so big that the few extra button inputs it takes is burdensome? I see this complaint all over the forums and I just don't believe it's sincere. It's desperate straw grasping and I'll prove it in a minute.

 

Quote

 it's simply not wanted

THEN DON'T BUY IT!

 

Quote

I'm arguing for removing a problem for them,

A problem they voluntarily pay to have? Do I have that right?

 

Quote

What I'm arguing for is not removing games, not even the apps,

But the floods tho?

 

See, I told you I would prove that complaint was not sincere.

 

Quote

I just want to see only one stack/asset swap of the clearly easiest/fastest games count on the leaderboard. In fact, I also want to give more value to the trophies less people get, and remove the massive boost the platinum got, that devalues all the other trophies, and especially the PSN 100%s.

So just this one site will use different point-values for trophies than the standard ones set by Sony?

 

So different leaderboard sites can use their own scoring systems made up arbitrarily based on who complains in the forum the most?

 

I'm pretty sure that would completely obliterate the entire hobby of trophy-hunting for absolutely everyone in about 3 seconds. Maybe you should think it through a little more.

[PhyrxianLibrarin]

There's no system for a leaderboard that isn't going to be exploitable in some way by the real devoted hunters. If you cut it off by rarity, hunters will specifically target games that are just below that rarity. If you cut it by time, hunters will play games just over that time. No matter what the math behind the leaderboard is, a small number of people are going to look for gaps and loopholes in the math and take advantage of them.

 

The main difference is that the current system is not only exploitable, it's being exploited in a way that has a direct result on the actual contents of Sony's PSN store, and that impacts way more people than just this site. In a very real sense, these "developers" only exist because PSNP works the way it does. The site created this problem, the site has the ability to solve it.

[Leenewbe]

I've hidden my leader board stats, thx to husky, it would be nice to look though the games on the site without having to sift though the shit that gets released these days though, if that were ever an option.

[GUDGER666]

8 minutes ago, PalaceOfLove706 said:

 

 

8 minutes ago, PalaceOfLove706 said:

These clicker games have like 50-100 owners. Maybe a couple hundred when you include the stacks. This website has almost 500k members. There is no problem with the leaderboards. These games are hardly being played. It’s a joke saying the only way to rank up is to play these games. Barely anyone is playing them. 

Yea when they are new but after a few weeks/months they rise to 1000s. 

Edited October 18, 2022 by GUDGER666

[MMDE]

5 minutes ago, PhyrxianLibrarin said:

There's no system for a leaderboard that isn't going to be exploitable in some way by the real devoted hunters. If you cut it off by rarity, hunters will specifically target games that are just below that rarity. If you cut it by time, hunters will play games just over that time. No matter what the math behind the leaderboard is, a small number of people are going to look for gaps and loopholes in the math and take advantage of them.

 

The main difference is that the current system is not only exploitable, it's being exploited in a way that has a direct result on the actual contents of Sony's PSN store, and that impacts way more people than just this site. In a very real sense, these "developers" only exist because PSNP works the way it does. The site created this problem, the site has the ability to solve it.

 

My suggestion targets multiple things. It's not games, it's stacks and asset swaps.

 

And good fucking luck trying to target 80%. ?

[Ashande]

33 minutes ago, GraniteBeast603 said:

Oh yes it absolutely does!! How do you not see it? Social decency says that it's none of your business what another person does with their playstation console. He's advocating for things that subjugate some people's voluntary pursuits below others'. What's socially decent about that?

[…]

 

I typed a very long (and borderline insulting) post that referenced a few of your previous statements on similar subjects, then decided you’re not worth further derailment or potential censure, so I’ll just say this: voicing an opinion or discussing changes to what, at the end of the day, boils down to a mathematical formula on a fansite doesn’t come under the banner of unlawful or socially indecent. Given your penchant for hyperbole, at this point one might as well say that flagging games, banning CFW and yeeting hackers and cheaters off the Leaderboards is “subjugating someone’s voluntary pursuits,” or placing such players “beneath others” and start making an argument against those things, too.

 

Further, what about the companies producing these things? Aren’t they also “subjugating someone’s voluntary pursuits,” since, to stay competitive, the top hunters are effectively forced to play piles of these things to maintain their placement, let alone advance, and thus removing their personal choice in how to hunt/rise in rank or what they want to play? Or is it only forced, socially indecent and “subjugation” when it’s a stance you don’t agree with or dislike?

[Darling Baphomet]

3 minutes ago, PalaceOfLove706 said:

These clicker games have like 50-100 owners. Maybe a couple hundred when you include the stacks. This website has almost 500k members. There is no problem with the leaderboards. These games are hardly being played. It’s a joke saying the only way to rank up is to play these games. Barely anyone is playing them. 

 

Alexa, play circus music.

 

 

In fact, I've yet to see a single trophy spam game on your list that conforms to your estimate of 50-100 owners. The lowest was 180. Odd, given you're clearly well acquainted with them.

 

[PalaceOfLove706]

Even a thousand game owners is nothing. There are 5.56 million gamers tracked on this website. Hardly anyone is playing these games and the leaderboards are not tainted like others are saying. 

[MMDE]

2 minutes ago, Darling Baphomet said:

 

Alexa, play circus music.

 

 

In fact, I've yet to see a single trophy spam game on your list that conforms to your estimate of 50-100 owners. The lowest was 180. Odd, given you're clearly well acquainted with them.

 

 

Those are recent too.

 

https://psnprofiles.com/search/games?q=the AND jumping

 

^ IMO all the same app.

Edited October 18, 2022 by MMDE

[GUDGER666]

11 minutes ago, MMDE said:

I just want to see the stacks above 80% go, maybe add some extra points to trophies based on rarity (like TT), and treat the asset swaps as stacks. The effect of this is massive.

How hard is it to do something like this, and would it take a long time to make the changes?

[GraniteBeast603]

9 minutes ago, Ashande said:

I typed a very long (and borderline insulting) post that referenced a few of your previous statements on similar subjects,

I'll ask my favorite question that never gets a straight answer: Which sentence did you have a problem with?

 

Quote

voicing an opinion or discussing changes to what, at the end of the day, boils down to a mathematical formula on a fansite doesn’t come under the banner of unlawful or socially indecent.

Someone dumping out their purse and broadcasting all their toxic jealousy and resentment is socially indecent. We'll have to agree to disagree on this point.

 

Quote

the top hunters are effectively forced to play piles of these things to maintain their placement

Did you really just say this after calling me hyperbolic?

 

It's a good thing irony can't hurt people. I'd be dead!

Edited October 18, 2022 by GraniteBeast603

[MMDE]

Just now, GUDGER666 said:

How hard is it to do something like this, and would it take a long time to make the changes?

 

Ask Sly. It shouldn't REALLY take that long... but who knows. It's up to Sly.

[Darling Baphomet]

5 minutes ago, Ashande said:

Aren’t they also “subjugating someone’s voluntary pursuits,” since, to stay competitive, the top hunters are effectively forced to play piles of these things to maintain their placement, let alone advance, and thus removing their personal choice in how to hunt/rise in rank or what they want to play?

 

Being motivated to do a thing for your own personal benefit is not, in fact, the same thing as being forced to do that thing. 

[PhyrxianLibrarin]

Just now, GUDGER666 said:

How hard is it to do something like this, and would it take a long time to make the changes?

 

It's not hard, the leaderboard already adjusts for games that have been flagged, so there's some custom logic already in place.

 

But no further development is being done on PSNP, so it will never actually happen.

[Ashande]

1 minute ago, GraniteBeast603 said:

I'll ask my favorite question that never gets a straight answer: Which sentence did you have a problem with?

 

Someone dumping out their purse and broadcasting all their toxic jealousy and resentment is socially indecent. We'll have to agree to disagree on this point.

 

I don't think that word means what you think it means.

 

Your reference to subjugation, primarily. Because no one is being “subjugated.” Since you want to argue about definitions, taking umbrage with my use of the term “forced” (which means precisely what I think it means, thank you very much; if Top Hunter 69 wants to stay ahead of Top Hunter 420, and Top Hunter 420 buys 8 stacks of Jumping Pissant Deluxe, then Top Hunter 69 must also buy 8 stacks of Jumping Pissant Deluxe in order to stay afloat, let alone put any distance between them. Or is there some other mysterious way that he might make up those 8 Platinums in a half-hour or so? If there is not some other manner, then he has effectively been forced to take a certain action and behave in a certain way to achieve his aims), let’s talk definitions. “Subjugate: Bring under dominion or control, especially by conquest.” Voicing an opinion doesn’t give you control of someone - unless that someone is pathetically weak-willed, drugged or under the effects of the Dominate Discipline from Vampire: The Masquerade, or if they’re one of those church mothers from the 80s who believed even glancing at a Dungeons and Dragons book would summon demons and turn you against Jesus.

 

You can also lump basically everything you said about Assassin’s Creed II in the category of “sentences I have problems with”, since it was bombastic hogwash reduced to the smallest possible common denominator (as regards it being the same as Hump Jump and co.), with the exception of your claim that you earned the “Doctor” trophy by “just pressing X,” which is an outright lie (since you have to press other buttons to use the poison dart. A technicality? Sure is. But I am not above being nitpicky, especially when you so love to dissect every word and assume venomous intent or stupidity in each one.)

 

If you are someone who believes threads of this nature are just people “dumping out their purse and broadcasting all their toxic jealousy and resentment,” (and consider them socially indecent), I suspect you don’t own a mirror.

 

You’ll count it as a win, I’m sure, and discard my words as just coming from that “socially indecent” corner - despite, ironically, that while I dislike the Pay4Plat situation, I also tend to say “Meh,” shrug, and say “if that’s what people want to do, then have at it” and have on more than one occasion defended their right to exist - but I’m done discussing the matter with you. Have fun. Go play. Touch some grass. I’m not derailing this any further than it already has been.

18 minutes ago, Darling Baphomet said:

 

Being motivated to do a thing for your own personal benefit is not, in fact, the same thing as being forced to do that thing. 

 

If it is the only means by which you can achieve your goal, and that goal is so bloody important to you that you consider it being “subjugated” that anyone would consider discussing anything that may impede your goal, and your choice is ditch the goal or do the thing, your hand has been forced.

[GUDGER666]

I think all the Mods/CRT etc should all go on strike and demand changes lol. Imo that is the only way anything will change. 

[GraniteBeast603]

3 minutes ago, Ashande said:

; if Top Hunter 69 wants to stay ahead of Top Hunter 420, and Top Hunter 420 buys 8 stacks of Jumping Pissant Deluxe, then Top Hunter 69 must also buy 8 stacks of Jumping Pissant Deluxe in order to stay afloat, let alone put any distance between them.

Yeah, if someone wants to win a contest, they have to compete with everyone else trying to win that contest. If someone in that field is willing to dispense with "fun" in their games for the sake of winning that contest, then that is what it takes to win. If you want to compete with that, then you have to do the same thing. But none of it is "forced".

 

Quote

let’s talk definitions. “Subjugate: Bring under dominion or control, especially by conquest.” Voicing an opinion doesn’t give you control of someone

You claim to not want to de-rail the thread. But here you are forcing me to give you a vocabulary lesson. Sometimes words  have more than one definition. Had you moved  your eyes three pixels lower on your google search, you would have noticed that "subjugate" also means: make someone or something subordinate to

 

It's that second definition that applies to what MMDE is saying. He wants certain trophies to count and other, subjugated trophies to not count. He wants some trophies to count more than the less worth, subjugated trophies.

 

Quote

You can also lump basically everything you said about Assassin’s Creed II in the category of “sentences I have problems with”, since it was bombastic hogwash reduced to the smallest possible common denominator

Dude, that game is 95% auto-pilot. I can beat Ninja Gaiden for the NES in under a half hour, I can beat Contra on one life. Those games only had 8bits and only two damn buttons! Yet, the complicated button sequences required to master them are genuinely impressive to this very day. So excuse me if I'm disappointed when all it takes to perform a complex and highly athletic enemy kill is a little tap on the square button.

[PhyrxianLibrarin]

6 minutes ago, GraniteBeast603 said:

Dude, that game is 95% auto-pilot. I can beat Ninja Gaiden for the NES in under a half hour, I can beat Contra on one life. Those games only had 8bits and only two damn buttons! Yet, the complicated button sequences required to master them are genuinely impressive to this very day. So excuse me if I'm disappointed when all it takes to perform a complex and highly athletic enemy kill is a little tap on the square button.

 

 

I think this thread has run its course.

[GUDGER666]

8 minutes ago, GraniteBeast603 said:

So excuse me if I'm disappointed when all it takes to perform a complex and highly athletic enemy kill is a little tap on the square button.

Be pretty daft imo if you had to press anything else. What would you want it to require you to do? 

[GraniteBeast603]

Just now, GUDGER666 said:

Be pretty daft imo if you had to press anything else. What would you want it to require you to do? 

 

I don't know man. All I know is that we got six more buttons plus two more directional inputs and the games got simpler.

 

Does not compute.

[Bumperklever]

21 minutes ago, GraniteBeast603 said:

Yeah, if someone wants to win a contest, they have to compete with everyone else trying to win that contest. If someone in that field is willing to dispense with "fun" in their games for the sake of winning that contest, then that is what it takes to win. If you want to compete with that, then you have to do the same thing. But none of it is "forced".

 

Most people on the top leaderboard said that they rather just didnt have these games at all, yet they are "p(l)aying" them just to stick around in the top of the leaderboard. 

 

Seems to me that it is all forced.

 

Furthermore its not an easy answer as: Just stop. Lol.

 

In the end I always draw lines with addictions in this case. I dont see a heavy smoker suddenly stopping 1 day and been clean for the rest of his life. Well not regulary atleast. 

 

[TheBusToYoker]

1 hour ago, MMDE said:

 

Ask Sly. It shouldn't REALLY take that long... but who knows. It's up to Sly.

 

It would take less time if there was some kind of group to work out the substance of the changes, and all he has to do is the code.

[GraniteBeast603]

10 minutes ago, Bumperklever said:

 

Most people on the top leaderboard said that they rather just didnt have these games at all, yet they are "p(l)aying" them just to stick around in the top of the leaderboard. 

 

What do you think this proves? Of course they prefer the games be fun. But some players are willing to forego fun "just to stick around".

 

That's like saying an athlete prefers to never practice and just compete in games. Of course they feel that way! Less work, less injury, and they only indulge in the best part of their job. But if they want to WIN, then they're going to have to work at it. They're going to have to do some things that aren't "fun".