Should Shovelware Be Worth Zero Points?

[Thrillhelm]

14 minutes ago, The Alchemist said:

 

I don't think it's because we can't keep up, I think it's more that we choose not to keep up, because we understand that attempting to keep pace with the leaderboards is futile and the only way to even stand a chance of keeping up is by buying and playing these shovelware trophy apps at a never-ending pace. That is something that a majority here simply do not want to do. 

 

You almost make it sound like we're jealous, when in reality I think a lot of us don't even care about the leaderboards at all. It isn't even really about the leaderboards, it's about trying to put a stop to these shady developers and their never-ending stream of shite once and for all. Hiding the games from view on the front page is a start, as is the PSN Store doing something similar regarding the new games section, but neither quick fix really solves the issue entirely.

 

If Sony isn't willing to step in to stop these "games" being sold on the PSN Store, and if people aren't willing to stop purchasing them of their own accord, then perhaps making them literally worthless from a points perspective could force people to stop buying them, because then they wouldn't really have any reason left to keep doing so. Sure, platinum/trophy counts would still increase, but at least you wouldn't gain anything as far as leaderboards are concerned, so that might be enough to put a lot of people off. And if enough people stop buying these things, then maybe these developers will go away for good.

 

It's a drastic proposal, I admit, but it looks like it'll be up to us as a community to sort this issue out, because Sony and nobody else is seemingly going to do anything about it anytime soon. But regardless, it's just that, a proposal. It's been all but confirmed already that it will in reality never happen, and instead a rarity leaderboard seems the most likely outcome. 

If you have chosen not to buy certain games thats ok, but dont force people who bought those game to go out of the competition by demanding 0 points for those games.

 

Trophy hunting was and is a matter of resource management, includes time, money, and access to games. If you have enough money you can buy the games you need, if you have time to play those games then you get more trophies, if you have multiple accounts or are part of a group that shares physical copies (visual novels for example) then you have the edge.

 

Skill is also part of trophy hunting, no doubt. But in order to get up the ranks you need resource management.

[GUDGER666]

28 minutes ago, iriihutoR84 said:

The leaderboards have never been about skill

There use to be a lot of skill involved during the PS3 days and the early PS4 days. 

[iriihutoR84]

1 hour ago, GUDGER666 said:

There use to be a lot of skill involved during the PS3 days and the early PS4 days. 

 

In the sense that someone terrible at video games couldn't reach a high position like today but it was never about the top people on the leaderboards being some sort of exceptionally skilled gamers. Maybe it took some skill in the very earliest days when there just weren't many games with trophies but that ended long before the Ratalaika Revolution.

[TheBlaskar]

If "Hide 0%" is an option, "Hide Shovelware" should be an option, too

[Thrillhelm]

2 minutes ago, APeskyAxolotl said:

If "Hide 0%" is an option, "Hide Shovelware" should be an option, too

Which is comparing apples with grapes.

[Mellenthin]

9 minutes ago, Thrillhelm said:

Which is comparing apples with grapes.

 

Not really. Both are equally disgusting - 0% and shovelware that is.?

[GUDGER666]

10 minutes ago, iriihutoR84 said:

 

In the sense that someone terrible at video games couldn't reach a high position like today but it was never about the top people on the leaderboards being some sort of exceptionally skilled gamers. 

Most if not all the top people were playing hard games. And every game required skill to complete them in fast times. Most of the games weren't handouts like they became. 

[Thrillhelm]

4 minutes ago, Mellenthin said:

 

Not really. Both are equally disgusting - 0% and shovelware that is.

So we are arguing with feelings now instead of facts? 

[Mellenthin]

3 minutes ago, Thrillhelm said:

So we are arguing with feelings now instead of facts? 

Is there a difference?

 

Relax, I was merely jesting.?

[MonaSaxPayne]

12 minutes ago, Thrillhelm said:

So we are arguing with feelings now instead of facts? 

“Now”? lol

[ASMODAIOS344]

We can all agree that @ScintillaWolff method is the best?.

 

Now back to the question, zero points sounds a little extreme don't know how that will be accepted for the TOP users of the leaderboard.

 

What you all think for a alternative leaderboard, that take only crap games in consideration along with multiple stacks of different version?.  I personally i only have one account others have many so i don't know if they like it.

Edited October 25, 2022 by ASMODAIOS344

[ScintillaWolf]

3 hours ago, Thrillhelm said:

If you have chosen not to buy certain games thats ok, but dont force people who bought those game to go out of the competition by demanding 0 points for those games.

 

Trophy hunting was and is a matter of resource management, includes time, money, and access to games. If you have enough money you can buy the games you need, if you have time to play those games then you get more trophies, if you have multiple accounts or are part of a group that shares physical copies (visual novels for example) then you have the edge.

 

Skill is also part of trophy hunting, no doubt. But in order to get up the ranks you need resource management.

 

Whether you make a good point or not, the thought of earning trophies through playing fun legitimate games taking a backseat to 'resource management' utterly depresses me.

 

And maybe that's the real problem here. The fact that that is the reality.

[Thrillhelm]

6 minutes ago, ScintillaWolf said:

 

Whether you make a good point or not, the thought of earning trophies through playing fun legitimate games taking a backseat to 'resource management' utterly depresses me.

 

And maybe that's the real problem here. The fact that that is the reality.

Who says that? As mentioned, shovelware only gets you this far in the leaderboards, and for example Hakoom had the time to play good games (lets say games people mostly agree they're good), putting them on milestones etc. Something the #1 on the German leaderboard also does. Its easy to say "they only play these games" when thats the thing you want to see. I mean people feast on profiles for stat-shaming, but it helps a certain narrative to leave out certain information, like the only thing is played are shovelware.

 

Remember Visual Novels took a guide and back then they were considered quick platinums, and most of the easy games back then weren't that much time consuming.

 

Dante's Inferno, Mini Ninjas or Burnout Paradise for example were easy platinum trophies (100% was a different story), with games like Hannah Montana or Megamind being the exception. Yet still you had to get these games somehow. And for the leaderboard it didnt hurt to play those games.

 

If resource management in a certain competition depresses you then don't take part in it, but do not point fingers at those who do.

 

 

 

 

[majob]

On 10/24/2022 at 6:18 AM, enaysoft said:

 

Speaking of Elk, we haven't seen this picture in a while.

 

Just gotta say this as someone who hunts that small game is much harder than large game. The bigger the target, the easier it is to shoot

[ScintillaWolf]

7 minutes ago, Thrillhelm said:

Who says that? As mentioned, shovelware only gets you this far in the leaderboards, and for example Hakoom had the time to play good games (lets say games people mostly agree they're good), putting them on milestones etc. Something the #1 on the German leaderboard also does. Its easy to say "they only play these games" when thats the thing you want to see. I mean people feast on profiles for stat-shaming, but it helps a certain narrative to leave out certain information, like the only thing is played are shovelware.

 

Remember Visual Novels took a guide and back then they were considered quick platinums, and most of the easy games back then weren't that much time consuming.

 

Dante's Inferno, Mini Ninjas or Burnout Paradise for example were easy platinum trophies (100% was a different story), with games like Hannah Montana or Megamind being the exception. Yet still you had to get these games somehow. And for the leaderboard it didnt hurt to play those games.

 

If resource management in a certain competition depresses you then don't take part in it, but do not point fingers at those who do.

 

 

 

 

 

I mean that it's depressing that people have to do these games in order to compete or stay at the top. Would be nice if they could maintain a high leaderboard position without having to feed these developers who are exploiting the hobby.

 

I don't believe I was finger pointing at anyone, I was just sharing my opinion, like you have frequently. We are allowed to have differencing opinions. I wish you no ill will, I just find the idea that these games exist depressing, seen as they only really exist due to leaderboards.

[DeepEyes7]

3 hours ago, Thrillhelm said:

If you have chosen not to buy certain games thats ok, but dont force people who bought those game to go out of the competition by demanding 0 points for those games.

 

Trophy hunting was and is a matter of resource management, includes time, money, and access to games. If you have enough money you can buy the games you need, if you have time to play those games then you get more trophies, if you have multiple accounts or are part of a group that shares physical copies (visual novels for example) then you have the edge.

 

Skill is also part of trophy hunting, no doubt. But in order to get up the ranks you need resource management.

 

You are right, the trophy dynamic changed and now to stay up in the MAIN LB you need to do this, that will never change and there wont be any propossal that will change that fact.

 

Now, proposing alternate LBs where other people feels more acomplishment and that cater to their tastes is understandable too, even if it is called ezpz sucks and anything from jumping to rata amounts to zero, the main LB will always be there for you.

[Bumperklever]

3 hours ago, Thrillhelm said:

Trophy hunting was and is a matter of resource management, includes time, money, and access to games. If you have enough money you can buy the games you need, if you have time to play those games then you get more trophies, if you have multiple accounts or are part of a 

 

But in order to get up the ranks you need resource management.

 

I guess I will call the top of the leaderboard "resource managers" from now on. 

 

But yeah true, and like deepeyes said, an alternative leaderboard will fill the need to add a certain element of skill in games to the mix (altough it is not always 100% correct.). While not disturbing the current resource managing leaderboard.

[steel6burgh]

3 hours ago, Thrillhelm said:

Trophy hunting was and is a matter of resource management, includes time, money, and access to games. If you have enough money you can buy the games you need, if you have time to play those games then you get more trophies, if you have multiple accounts or are part of a group that shares physical copies (visual novels for example) then you have the edge.

 

Skill is also part of trophy hunting, no doubt. But in order to get up the ranks you need resource management.

 I have looked at the number 2 guy's list quite a few times and added up the amount of time he plays each day and it's usually no more than two to three hours.  Also you can buy about 30 to 40 platinums for the same money someone spends on one real game.  To say you have figured out some sort of time and resource management is quite a stretch.  as a matter of fact it took 0 intuition and resourcefulness on the part of the people that play these game.  The games were made to be cheap and quick that was and is the whole purpose.  To act like you have some sort of edge up in resourcefulness and time and money management is a bit delusional.

 

It would be like if I starved myself and told everyone I figured out the solution for dieting.  It would be cheaper than any other method and quicker than any other method. Does that make me resourceful and good at time management?  No the person who is resourceful and good with time is the guy who goes to work everyday and comes home and gets some really nice games done at nights and over weekends and amasses a few hundred respectful platinums while juggling a job and family life.  At the same time he played enjoyable games and didn't exploit a hobby.  It's insulting to hear you think you are going about the hobby smarter than everyone else.  nah you are using a time management exploit set out for you by the developers of these games.

[TheBusToYoker]

43 minutes ago, Thrillhelm said:

As mentioned, shovelware only gets you this far in the leaderboards

 

So why are you so invested in it if the leaderboard gains aren't so great in your opinion?

[Thrillhelm]

8 minutes ago, Bumperklever said:

 

I guess I will call the top of the leaderboard "resource managers" from now on. 

 

But yeah true, and like deepeyes said, an alternative leaderboard will fill the need to add a certain element of skill in games to the mix (altough it is not always 100% correct.). While not disturbing the current resource managing leaderboard.

I start to think people hold a grudge against the top leaderboard.

 

5 minutes ago, steel6burgh said:

I have looked at the number 2 guy's list quite a few times and added up the amount of time he plays each day and it's usually no more than two to three hours.  Also you can buy about 30 to 40 platinums for the same money someone spends on one real game.  To say you have figured out some sort of time and resource management is quite a stretch.  as a matter of fact it took 0 intuition and resourcefulness on the part of the people that play these game.  The games were made to be cheap and quick that was and is the whole purpose.  To act like you have some sort of edge up in resourcefulness and time and money management is a bit delusional.

 

It would be like if I starved myself and told everyone I figured out the solution for dieting.  It would be cheaper than any other method and quicker than any other method. Does that make me resourceful and good at time management?  No the person who is resourceful and good with time is the guy who goes to work everyday and comes home and gets some really nice games done at nights and over weekends and amasses a few hundred respectful platinums while juggling a job and family life.  At the same time he played enjoyable games and didn't exploit a hobby.  It's insulting to hear you think you are going about the hobby smarter than everyone else.  nah you are using a time management exploit set out for you by the developers of these games.

Well numbers dont lie I guess. For the purpose of staying on top of the leaderboard, playing quick games for little money seems like the thing to do. I'd say its rather desilusional to tell people how to spend their time and money, especially when forcing a narrative which contains a competition that fits one's own agenda.

 

You see that resource management didnt start with ratalaika games or the current shovelware games, just have to go back to the late PS3 and Vita era with Visual novels. Someone managed to get his hands on a copy, and people went further to create forums in which these games (we're talking about physical copies) were shared or traded. That gave them an edge to competitors. And some of them are still in the top 100. But like today someone had to point fingers and argues with feelings or strawman's argument. Always will be someone pissed.

 

 

24 minutes ago, DeepEyes7 said:

 

You are right, the trophy dynamic changed and now to stay up in the MAIN LB you need to do this, that will never change and there wont be any propossal that will change that fact.

 

Now, proposing alternate LBs where other people feels more acomplishment and that cater to their tastes is understandable too, even if it is called ezpz sucks and anything from jumping to rata amounts to zero, the main LB will always be there for you.

Yet every approach for a rarity LB, in my opinion, is flawed and unfair (subject to manipulation) and will open the floodgates for further harassment, as seen in threads about that topic. 

Forcing a rule for shovelware being worth 0 points is a worse idea, but that doesnt mean a rarity board is a solution, but a lot of threads are used to push a certain agenda.

 

You just mix up the leaderboard for a while, but there will be soon a new meta with less games, and those who do care about leaderboards will adapt to that.  

 

And since people argue with feelings, will a rarity leaderboard be that much of a great idea if good games (again, what people commonly agree as good games) are cancelled out or de-valued because the trophies are achievable for everyone (Ghost of Tsushima for example)?

 

I rather think some people realize they will not advance in the leaderboard because of the current meta and try to change that by taking something away from others. This very thread started with advocating the idea of giving shovelware 0 points, with a huge grey line what defines a game as shuffleware. I think this is unfair and makes a leaderboard shallow.

 

And multiple leaderboards? Right now the choice of games a user picks can be used against them. Imagine one person is in the top 1000 in the leaderboard but some 20000 in the rarity leaderboard. Fingers will be pointed, names will be given.

2 minutes ago, AMadScotsGuy said:

 

So why are you so invested in it if the leaderboard gains aren't so great in your opinion?

Because it still gets you far, just not at the top and especially not if you started one or two years ago. Some names in the top 10 for example are there for years for a reason.

 

[coldspectre]

As soon as trophies are deemed 'shovelware' and are worth '0 points' people will migrate to the websites without these policies.

[Bumperklever]

14 minutes ago, Thrillhelm said:

I start to think people hold a grudge against the top leaderboard.

 

Well numbers dont lie I guess. For the purpose of staying on top of the leaderboard, playing quick games for little money seems like the thing to do. I'd say its rather desilusional to tell people how to spend their time and money, especially when forcing a narrative which contains a competition that fits one's own agenda.

 

You see that resource management didnt start with ratalaika games or the current shovelware games, just have to go back to the late PS3 and Vita era with Visual novels. Someone managed to get his hands on a copy, and people went further to create forums in which these games (we're talking about physical copies) were shared or traded. That gave them an edge to competitors. And some of them are still in the top 100. But like today someone had to point fingers and argues with feelings or strawman's argument. Always will be someone pissed.

 

 

I just found it correct (and kinda funny) to call this whole ordeal just resource management, cuz frankly it is. You are totally correct

 

A rarity leaderboard will be having less effect of resource management though, because to be the ultimate number 1, you still need to have skill somewhere. Something that is totally lacking in the current leaderboard. (unless you want to call resource managing of the daily easy gamereleases a skill lol.).

 

Actually the more I think about it, it might even be a lot harder to find "easy UR games" that alone should require more skill then the current leaderboard.

 

---

But luckily I am not part of these "I need to rush the (any kind of) leaderboard" group, I just like to have fun when I'm gaming.

Anyway that doesn't stop me from saying that it would be kinda cool to have a rarity leaderboard next to the current one.

[bosstristan]

Voted yes.

Shovelware should not even be a thing in the first place. They should thus be removed or hidden/not taken into account in specialized websites like PSNP.

[TheBlaskar]

2 hours ago, Thrillhelm said:

Which is comparing apples with grapes.

Not a very fruitful rebuttal. My point is not that they're similar, my point is that the purpose and tech exist, so the option to use them should be up to the individual

[bosstristan]

1 hour ago, APeskyAxolotl said:

If "Hide 0%" is an option, "Hide Shovelware" should be an option, too

 

Excactly!

With a nice marker in addition to it, like the dreadful H :