PS Rewired now has a custom server as well

[DaivRules]

13 minutes ago, ryuji_sakujo said:

Care to elaborate on what the requirements are?

 

https://forum.psnprofiles.com/topic/52663-what-constitutes-a-flag/

 

Can't find any mention of "open source", maybe I'm looking in the wrong post..

 

A friend of mine has the following concern:

"Anyone who uses an unapproved server deserves to be flagged, even if it meets all the criteria and/or is approved later. That should be stated explicitly in the post, but it's not."

As far as anyone who is concerned with being on the leaderboards on this site, the only requirement that’s relevant is being listed on the link you provided. 
 

If it isn’t listed, it isn’t approved. Anyone trying to argue around that is just trying to be difficult. 
 

 

[ryuji_sakujo]

15 hours ago, B1rvine said:

If you're saying the CRT should help with these other areas, I agree, but we're locked to the backend access we have access to. If you're saying the community is spending too much time hunting down cheaters, I'd disagree. I'd wager 99.9% of the community don't really care, and just come across them by happenstance while looking at stats, then file a report when they see something that's fishy.

If that's the case, then that's fair enough. It should be a mostly automated job and a crowd sourced low-effort task.

 

15 hours ago, B1rvine said:

Well, I have solutions for clever cheating, but the I don't think the community actually wants an effective approach. Every time suggestions to improve efficiency have been made, the team gets booed, shamed, or worse.

As long as it's non-invasive and doesn't require members to submit their passport information or have a screen capture card set up and have every trophy pop verified by a staff member it should be fine. I jest, but yeah I don't see it as a problem unless it's invasive.

 

15 hours ago, B1rvine said:

Shared accounts are a slippery slope. The team generally agrees permanent fast rank-up teams shouldn't be allowed, only the occasional spouse/family member who may earn a trophy by accident should be allowed, but that's hard to enforce. There are methods to determine the difference, however.

There's no way to verify or validate this unless assumptions are made based on trophy timestamps.
If an account earns trophies around the clock it could be eg. a couple that are working shifts that don't overlap and play on the same account, or a college dorm that plays on the same console on the same account. I don't know of any methods to consistently determine the difference unless you chew through a lot of data with a neural net..
If you have any special "methods" in mind, please do elaborate. This goes back to my earlier point about PSNProfiles probably should be more transparent and disclose how things work "behind the scenes" if they expect the same to be upheld by these revival projects.

 

15 hours ago, B1rvine said:

Once someone knows how to game the system, no automatic process will ever work. Then it becomes and endless process of fixing the system. There are some automatic processes in place, and the team has built software to semi-automate things, but there will always be work to do no matter what.

If the heuristics and automation is sophisticated enough, it will solve an adequate amount of the problems and get better over time seeing as how there's more data being generated on this website over time and neural net models get more efficient (if that's not the case, hire more developers).
If the problem is too hard to solve at the moment, then just collect the data and don't bother pouring in manual work into it, not worth the time. In fact I'm not sure that this endeavor of chasing down edge cases is worth it at all. Back to my earlier point, simply flag the low hanging fruit. As long as regular trophy hunters don't feel like they are getting robbed of their leaderboard spots and the boards are not saturated with cheaters then all should be good.

 

15 hours ago, B1rvine said:

There is information to check besides the timestamp, if you know what to look for, or have access to the data

Now would be a good time to share, transparency and disclosure.
I can't see why there's gotta be smoke and mirrors around things like this, it actually makes PSNP look more untrustworthy and opaque.

If I cared enough and had time I'd look into what data can be scraped from PSN user accounts:

https://www.psnleaderboard.com/api/
https://github.com/mgp25/psn-api
If PSNP is somehow privy to more information like that, for example if PlayStation officially exposes additional user information to their "partners" then it'd be pretty good to know.
I mean if someone is flagged on this website for whatever reason, a claim needs to be made by PSNP against the alleged offender and a chance for rebuttal needs to be given.

All this assuming people don't just get kicked off this platform or shadow banned without much to say.

My head hurts just thinking about all the effort that possibly goes into this because it's certainly not a simple problem to deal with, and the complex becomes complicated.. at the end of the day we're just here because we like to play videogames. ?

 

15 hours ago, B1rvine said:

As far as standards, there's simply no practical way to enforce certain things. For example, there's no way to know if someone never upgraded a game version, or in fact downgraded it.

Agreed, there are so many things into which PSNP doesn't have insight into and which can be manipulated on the client side (file saves, all kinds of network magic to manipulate client-server requests/responses, downgrading application version, etc.)..

it's basically impossible to determine foul play outside of some very obvious tells.. so why bother at all..

 

15 hours ago, B1rvine said:

As far as boosting sessions, technically they're about finding other gamers to play with. Once you're in that sessions, PSNP is in no way responsible for what you do. Some sessions are about coop. Some games require a "local" player, which is what shareplay is about, and regardless its a feature promoted by Sony.

This has to be the definition of "turning a blind eye" and letting things slide.
I can tell you for a fact that every session labeled "boosting" that I've been in, mostly organized through this website is people making it easier for each other popping trophies.

Those sessions don't even remotely resemble "the way the game was meant to be played", it's all about spawning, trading kills or wins, taking turns, rinse and repeat.

With the exception of PvE related stuff where you just gotta "get good and beat the raid boss" or whatever, for those sessions you might say that it's not as much boosting as teaming up and taking up a challenge together.

This is just arbitrarily letting people "cheat" because someone some time ago said it was fine.

 

15 hours ago, B1rvine said:

The open source requirement is less about whether or not a server is compromised, and more about ensuring no one person or group has control over it, which is the entire premise of open source, as you point out.

Open source doesn't even ensure decentralized control or anything of that sort. Open source literally has nothing to do with anything in regards to control, security, safety or integrity of the source code presented vs. what is actually running once your compile.

Like I said and other have mentioned, "open source" means there's a public recipe for chocolate cake. Now if you want to sprinkle chili flakes on top of that chocolate cake and claim that you used the "original recipe", that can be done as long as you hide the chili flakes cleverly, perhaps by baking it into the dough and masking the flavor. The ONLY way we would know that we're eating the original recipe is if McPSNP personally prepares and serves the cake for us in their authorized locations (servers), and even then there might be nefarious actors either working from inside PSNProfiles or otherwise spoofing PSNP and falsely identifying as PSNP clerks.

And again my opinion is that because all of this is such a headache, why not just assume that people are eating chocolate cake made according to the original recipe and just do an extra pass of monitoring timestamps of games that have been revived. If obvious foul play is done, that's when you should question the holders of those accounts.

I think a simple disclaimer, maybe a header with a warning text above revived games trophy list would suffice:
("Warning: This game is under heightened surveillance by the CRT, earning trophies in irregular patterns might lead to flags and penalties.")

Flat out giving most survival projects an unapproval stamp (again, because currently there are not enough resources to either host these servers or setting up infrastructure to run automated tests on the source code, even though that is far from sufficient to determine integrity) is hurting the community more than it helps, and I think people will decide for themselves what they wanna do anyway. At heart, members of PSNP and other trophy hunting communities are here to earn trophies, one way or another. We aren't here because we can easily do everything by ourselves, rather we find creative ways of reaching our goals (like teaming up or looking online for information, even some going as far as downgrading application versions or using revival servers). I don't think most trophy hunters that care more about their hunting journey rather than their standing in a community are gonna be dissuaded.

 

15 hours ago, B1rvine said:

As you yourself note, It's the advanced cheaters that are potentially the problem, and those are the ones actual time is invested into finding.

I don't see why anyone would bother with that.

Alternatively put the top 100 on the leaderboards on a higher scrutiny and don't waste effort on smaller fish..

Closing thoughts
Like @Long-Ryde said, who really cares? And if PSNP staff and the greater PSNP community cares, why?
Is there a manifesto or something I can read where PSNP goals and aims are outlined.
Like, this is a serious question.. what is this website about?
Because in my mind it's only been a comprehensive database, a host of trophy guides and tips, a way to share my own trophy tips, and a way to connect to people through sessions, (and occasionally read about peoples shit takes in the forums ?). It's been this way since more than 12 years back, but seems it has morphed into something else over time.

Genuinely curious about what direction this website aims to take and maybe a chronicle of how CRT formed, why, how was that decision taken and what perceived issue it aims to solve.
As I see it, there's just too many inconsistencies at this point and it's a tall order.. no actually an impossible task of working out who to flag when the variables are simply outside of PSNProfiles control, so why not take a "good faith" simplistic approach and just flag the most obvious offender and let the rest of the community enjoy their revived games.

I think @xXRathlosXx made a point in that just because something CAN happen, doesn't mean its likely to happen.

And a manual approval process for revived servers that change from patch to patch and can anyway have users run the code with arbitrary injections (or just fork the project and add some extra lines of code), literally makes no sense.

 

I really appreciate that a discourse can be held but I think minds are made up and the boat has sailed on public discourse of this matter for the most part as it stands today. =/

What has needed to be said from a factual point of view has been presented from all sides, what remains is an opinionated discourse on how to move forward and what core values staff and the community strive to instantiate with possible policy changes.
Thanks for letting me express what I had to say, I'll monitor this thread and hopefully will not feel the need to chip in with more thoughts.
I really wish the best for this website, been using it for years and it'd be great to see it become less involved in these types of regulations and just be a more agnostic meeting point for trophy hunters of all kinds so we can enjoy what we enjoy most, playing games and earning trophies.

Best of luck to the staff, you're doing a great job but I seriously question the commitments that you're taking upon your shoulders sometimes, and feels like some things can just get over complicated very quickly, especially things that involve subjective judgement and where there is lacking evidence.. I think such things are best left aside, or at most that they are handled in a very straight-forward way with super clear rules and not overly committed manner.To all trophy hunters, keep enjoying your games no matter what anyone says. If there's a fun game on a revived server and you're itching to play, go do it and don't let anyone persuade you or inhibit you in any way other than how you enjoy yourself.  I hope that honesty will prevail in the end and instead of having restrictions and limitations we can just enjoy things together and trust each other in good faith.

Edited January 29 by ryuji_sakujo

[ryuji_sakujo]

1 hour ago, DaivRules said:

As far as anyone who is concerned with being on the leaderboards on this site, the only requirement that’s relevant is being listed on the link you provided. 

If it isn’t listed, it isn’t approved. Anyone trying to argue around that is just trying to be difficult. 
 

 

• GameSpy server: PSNP thread (GoneSpy GitHub)
• Demon's Souls server: Yuvi (desse - GitHub)
• Saint's Row: The Third: Jumped In - PSNP thread (Simple DNS Plus)
• ModNation Racers: ModNationServer

So these 4.
May I ask what was the methodology of determining that they are "in accordance with PSNP guidelines"?
And further, there is no mention of the exact version (or commit hash) of which version was approved, so if changes are made (new commits) then are those still valid, or does the project need to be re-checked.

To my earlier question, I don't see any mention of the term "open source".
How often is this list updated, how often does staff take time to "approve" new projects? How prioritized is this in the "todo list" pipeline?
Effectively, what happens is, is that new revival projects pop up, but if they aren't quickly appraised by PSNP then it leaves community users (that are concerned about getting flagged) hanging and waiting for approval.

 

These are just open questions that point to some of the problems arising from the current approach.

I hope the process can be streamlined, perhaps a good first step is to "whitelist" uninvestigated projects and just blacklist them if any foul play surfaces (see my previous post with replies to @B1rvine)

[xXRathlosXx]

1 hour ago, DaivRules said:

As far as anyone who is concerned with being on the leaderboards on this site, the only requirement that’s relevant is being listed on the link you provided. 
 

If it isn’t listed, it isn’t approved. Anyone trying to argue around that is just trying to be difficult. 
 

 

 

I am new to this community, and as a result, I am unaware of the many facets of this site. My use is limited to guides, viewing trophy lists for games, and looking at specific metrics on my profile that I find interesting. Am I amiss for wondering what significance the leaderboards play for the average (average as in those who are not here for their leaderboard placement) end-user? Does anyone outside a small minority utilize the leaderboards? If the integrity of the leaderboards is of utmost importance, would it not make sense to allow users the option to opt-out? Forgive me for being curt. I reckon being new here has allowed me an opportunity to see things from an outside perspective. A lot of these issues can be resolved through minor quality-of-life implementations.

[DaivRules]

53 minutes ago, xXRathlosXx said:

 

I am new to this community, and as a result, I am unaware of the many facets of this site. My use is limited to guides, viewing trophy lists for games, and looking at specific metrics on my profile that I find interesting. Am I amiss for wondering what significance the leaderboards play for the average (average as in those who are not here for their leaderboard placement) end-user? Does anyone outside a small minority utilize the leaderboards? If the integrity of the leaderboards is of utmost importance, would it not make sense to allow users the option to opt-out? Forgive me for being curt. I reckon being new here has allowed me an opportunity to see things from an outside perspective. A lot of these issues can be resolved through minor quality-of-life implementations.

People who are interested in the leaderboards, are interested in the leaderboards, and any leaderboard has it’s applicable rules, as do the leaderboards here. If leaderboards are of no interest, people can just opt out by not looking at them, as many members here choose to do. 
 

People are free to play whatever games they choose in whatever manner they choose, but if they want their profile to participate (meaning appear) in the leaderboards here on this one site, then the trophies on their profile have to meet the sites leaderboard rules. 
 

 

Edited January 29 by DaivRules

[MonaSaxPayne]

@B1rvine, do u believe the flag rules need to be revamped?

[DaivRules]

1 hour ago, ryuji_sakujo said:

• GameSpy server: PSNP thread (GoneSpy GitHub)
• Demon's Souls server: Yuvi (desse - GitHub)
• Saint's Row: The Third: Jumped In - PSNP thread (Simple DNS Plus)
• ModNation Racers: ModNationServer

So these 4.
May I ask what was the methodology of determining that they are "in accordance with PSNP guidelines"?
And further, there is no mention of the exact version (or commit hash) of which version was approved, so if changes are made (new commits) then are those still valid, or does the project need to be re-checked.

To my earlier question, I don't see any mention of the term "open source".
How often is this list updated, how often does staff take time to "approve" new projects? How prioritized is this in the "todo list" pipeline?
Effectively, what happens is, is that new revival projects pop up, but if they aren't quickly appraised by PSNP then it leaves community users (that are concerned about getting flagged) hanging and waiting for approval.

 

These are just open questions that point to some of the problems arising from the current approach.

I hope the process can be streamlined, perhaps a good first step is to "whitelist" uninvestigated projects and just blacklist them if any foul play surfaces (see my previous post with replies to @B1rvine)

Really seems like you’re over complicating a much more simple thing. 
 

A member will draw attention to a new custom server by posting a thread generally about it. Several members here will usually seek out what information we can find, as very little is usually given. If there’s no source code, someone will ask where to find it so people can read it. If source code is available, some of us will generally read through it. I tend to grab the source code and compile my own instance to see if I can get it running or see if there’s obvious errors to troubleshoot and see if I can get the game connected as described. Once source code is found, the Cheater Removers are usually tagged in the thread. They take their time and make their evaluation and decide if the rules are updated with the server or not. 
There’s not a lot of examples of this happening. Less than a dozen over the years.

As have been brought up in previous discussions, these servers have been approved tentatively and if members bring up or examples are found of these servers being modified from original gameplay, they can have their blessing revoked. So exact version or commit hash isn’t necessary. 
The line of questioning seems overly pedantic, to be frank, for a very limited set of examples. And answering every single one of them provides no relevance to the matter that the approval of custom servers has been in-line with the intention of the existing leaderboard rules within the abilities of the resources given to the volunteer staff of the site.

I think it would be cool if the site could host PSNP servers for the approved games, but I don’t think that’s practical by any stretch of the imagination. 
I appreciate the effort these people who actually did the work to get these servers up and running and I think people should choose to play them. But I also think that it’s presumptuous to come to this site that has it’s own leaderboard and longer established rules and just say “accommodate my profile because I want what the sites leaderboard is offering, but on my terms” and expect the site staff to roll over. In these very rare circumstances the dichotomy of “I want these trophies on my profile because I just do” and “accept my whole profile to your sites leaderboards even though parts of it don’t qualify with your site requirements” is clearly a challenge for people to understand. 
 

[GorbHere]

I'm gonna echo Ryuji's sentiments here and ask it plainly: do you guys know what the community actually wants? Has there ever been any kind of poll to decide this shit? It seems really strange that the voices of the many can be so easily drowned out by a select few. I don't think the CRT guys should step back, but it seems absolutely comical that on a site with over 5 million accounts, we have *four* people in charge of making sure they're legit. And I'm understanding that this is mostly a manual process? I mean why are you doing this to yourselves? I'm not trying to make any enemies here but for who is all of this really for? We really do need to start running some site-wide polls to figure out what the hell we want from this place, or else threads like this are gonna just crop up again and again.

[Edusbr]

I agree with you @ChaoticFox9900, this is just one of many other threads related to the same exact thing where the same people talk about the same problems without closure. THAT is crazy, and it looks like it will remain like this for a long time.

[Moostache7]

42 minutes ago, DaivRules said:

But I also think that it’s presumptuous to come to this site that has it’s own leaderboard and longer established rules and just say “accommodate my profile because I want what the sites leaderboard is offering, but on my terms” and expect the site staff to roll over. In these very rare circumstances the dichotomy of “I want these trophies on my profile because I just do” and “accept my whole profile to your sites leaderboards even though parts of it don’t qualify with your site requirements” is clearly a challenge for people to understand. 

 

The devil's advocate to that is, what's the barrier for anyone? Is it not a level playing field of everyone can access the same thing?

 

Obviously nobody should be able to hop into a custom server that autopops everything. But it's disingenuous to think it's selfish accomodations being asked for, and not just a matter of people wanting to be able to earn trophies in old games that they miss. It's not always a reasonable ask, clearly, but to suggest something else is being asked doesn't seem like a fair assessment.

[DaivRules]

29 minutes ago, ChaoticFox9900 said:

We really do need to start running some site-wide polls to figure out what the hell we want from this place, or else threads like this are gonna just crop up again and again.

If somehow the majority of the 5 million accounts vote in a poll, will that somehow compel the singular site owner and admin to decide he no longer owns his site and it’s been mutinied by members so he now is forced to abide by their will?

Do people even know this site is owned by just one person who is the only admin for the site? Are there somehow assumptions this is a community owned and run site?

 

 

18 minutes ago, Moostache7 said:

The devil's advocate to that is, what's the barrier for anyone? Is it not a level playing field of everyone can access the same thing?

 

Obviously nobody should be able to hop into a custom server that autopops everything. But it's disingenuous to think it's selfish accomodations being asked for, and not just a matter of people wanting to be able to earn trophies in old games that they miss. It's not always a reasonable ask, clearly, but to suggest something else is being asked doesn't seem like a fair assessment.

The barrier is as low as it can practically be: everyone has access to the same resource to get started. 
 

People are free to go earn trophies in games they miss whenever they choose. Accommodations are being given, as shown by the list of approved custom servers. 
 

[GorbHere]

5 hours ago, DaivRules said:

If somehow the majority of the 5 million accounts vote in a poll, will that somehow compel the singular site owner and admin to decide he no longer owns his site and it’s been mutinied by members so he now is forced to abide by their will?

Do people even know this site is owned by just one person who is the only admin for the site? Are there somehow assumptions this is a community owned and run site?

 

Yeah, that's exactly what I meant. Maybe we can even own stock in it too. 

 

Is the idea of running a poll really that insane that you have to mischaracerize my argument? No shit Sly owns the site, is he genuinely the last word on every little thing that happens here? Should I be asking his for his permission to post on these forums too? I mean fuck man, what are you guys doing if it's all about him? 

Edited January 29 by ChaoticFox9900

[ryuji_sakujo]

5 hours ago, DaivRules said:

Really seems like you’re over complicating a much more simple thing. 
...

 

6 hours ago, DaivRules said:

...

 

People are free to play whatever games they choose in whatever manner they choose, but if they want their profile to participate (meaning appear) in the leaderboards here on this one site, then the trophies on their profile have to meet the sites leaderboard rules. 

Thanks for laying out the process of approving custom servers and clarifying the extent of how it affects our standings on this website. ?

 

The point I was trying to make is that there does not seem to be enough urgency in green lighting custom servers. Those 4 servers currently approved are years old, I'm not sure if they're still maintained. Even so we can't be sure that players earning trophies in those games are not forking the project and changing parameters which is problematic from an enforcement point of view (this point has already been raised).

 

The reason why greenlighting is urgent is because it potentially blocks a large numbers of users (who care about their leaderboards standings) for possibly a long period of time, within which the project might get taken down.

That would kind of be like an official server went down, then back up some time later but now needs approval from PSNP before people feel safe earning trophies again.

 

Anyway, your point about PSNP already having rules and guidelines, not bending over backwards to other inofficial tools that pop up totally makes sense. You guys make the rules top-down that the rest of us have to abide by. I guess most of us are just hoping that PSNP is a bit more flexible and accommodating in this manner, maybe with some policy changes the way these revival projects are reviewed, communicated and enforced can be a bit more streamlined and transparent for the betterment of this community, especially those that want to use these tools AND stay relevant in PSNP leaderboards.

[ryuji_sakujo]

5 hours ago, DaivRules said:

If somehow the majority of the 5 million accounts vote in a poll, will that somehow compel the singular site owner and admin to decide he no longer owns his site and it’s been mutinied by members so he now is forced to abide by their will?

Do people even know this site is owned by just one person who is the only admin for the site? Are there somehow assumptions this is a community owned and run site?

 

 

(Preface: This is the wrong thread to discuss this particular matter)

But with all due respect, is this really a winning concept? It's great that a single person has been able to scale the website to this point (mind you with a lot of help from staff and being fortunate to beat others to the punch and thus cultivating an active community that generate high-quality content like trophy guides for free), but I think it's worth having a discussion whether this will hold. A single point of failure is never a good idea, much less so when there's a community that wants to excert more influence over the content and direction of this website. Why suffocate the community with a top-down hierarchy when it can be flattened and made more inclusive, I know it's not an easy thing done over night but definitely should be up for discussion. There's tons of good examples of this working out, look at how the Stackoverflow or Python community is run, or Reddit.

 

I just fail to see the importance of upholding a monolithic structure of governance, clearly this community is passionate and some members have even taken it upon themselves to improve functionality of PSNP through browser plugins. Others have built bots or applications that are built on top of PSNP, it seems precarious and uncertain to have only a handful of people deciding over these matters.

 

(Again, this is quite a tangent in this thread)

There's tons of talented people that would love to chip in. Some concrete examples of great things to have would be an API for consuming PSNP data for developers.

And perhaps Reddit like voting system for approving custom servers and other matters.

I can't see how these changes come about on the back of a single admin, admirable as it's been thus far I think relinquishing control at least partially is necessary. Again, I'm confused about what the purpose of PSNProfiles is if it isn't to ultimately empower trophy hunters.. 

Edited January 29 by ryuji_sakujo

[HaserPL]

On 25.12.2022 at 1:25 PM, diskdocx said:

Sorry, I usually try to stay non-confrontational in these situations, but that statement is absurd. This could literally be applied to almost every game. If there is a public open source code server that has come back online and the trophies could be earned legitimately, then the game should be white flagged again.
 

I don’t really agree with the stance the site has taken with non-open source - you should still be able to tell if the trophies are earned in a legitimately way or autopopped - but I understand why the CRT has taken that stance. As it stands there are probably custom servers for games that still have the original servers running. You can’t possibly know this, and short of flagging every online trophy in every game, there comes a point where you just have to let the rigid line bend a little.

 

The litmus test needs to be “is there a legitimate process by which the trophies can be earned”? 

The problem with timestamps is, you can still cheat and make the timestamps legit, if you just wait in between trophies to pop them in a doable pace. Wait an hour and pop a trophy, boom, you can say you got a trophy which takes an hour legitimately. 

[pinkrobot_pb]

I think people who care about storming the leaderboards have moved onto shovelware region spam and will not waste time going for trophies on an old PS3 title. They will hardly be rallying for a green light on a single PS3 game from ages ago, if they could plat five more games in the time of making a single forum post.

 

So basically, at this point we can make the distinction between leaderboard stormers and people who just want to complete good and fun games. Personally I would definitely enjoy going for these trophies and getting this particular game completed. And without a doubt, it is awesome that the community is putting in all this effort to make online play available again.

 

I would use a voluntary opt-out of the leaderboards if it did not come with the stigma of being a cheater. I would disappear from the rankings as if I was flagged and it would make all of my trophies unflaggable, but I would remain a valid and 'respectable' member of this website. I'm sure something like that could be figured out with some time and effort.

Edited January 29 by pinkrobot_pb

[diskdocx]

3 hours ago, HaserPL said:

The problem with timestamps is, you can still cheat and make the timestamps legit, if you just wait in between trophies to pop them in a doable pace. Wait an hour and pop a trophy, boom, you can say you got a trophy which takes an hour legitimately. 

But this really applies to any hacked trophies. I'm not sure how the CRT detects that. I don't feel this applies uniquely to restored servers. Sure, there is no way to determine if there have been changes to the code that would affect how the trophies are obtained. Seems like that would be a lot more work, but it's entirely possible the restored servers change MP trophy requirements.

 

But so what?

 

Because sometimes devs change them as well. Double XP, triple XP, adjusting requirements. We don't ban people who had an easier road because criteria changed vs those that did it earlier and had a harder (or sometimes easier) path.

2 hours ago, pinkrobot_pb said:

I think people who care about storming the leaderboards have moved onto shovelware region spam and will not waste time going for trophies on an old PS3 title. They will hardly be rallying for a green light on a single PS3 game from ages ago, if they could plat five more games in the time of making a single forum post.

 

So basically, at this point we can make the distinction between leaderboard stormers and people who just want to complete good and fun games. Personally I would definitely enjoy going for these trophies and getting this particular game completed. And without a doubt, it is awesome that the community is putting in all this effort to make online play available again.

 

I would use a voluntary opt-out of the leaderboards if it did not come with the stigma of being a cheater. I would disappear from the rankings as if I was flagged and it would make all of my trophies unflaggable, but I would remain a valid and 'respectable' member of this website. I'm sure something like that could be figured out with some time and effort.

^ This. 100% this.

 

At the end of the day I have no skin in the game for this MP server, nor for the Transformers servers. I have all of these plats already, legitimately, before servers went dark.

 

I'd love to finish up KZ2, but I'm not going to lose sleep over it at this point.

 

It just seems like a ridiculously pointless hill to die on when we argue over this minutiae. The leaderboards have no integrity or meaning at this point. We kick someone off because they played a decade old game on a restored server, or joined a COD BO2 hacked server, but in the time it took to earn those trophies, someone else held X for an hour and earned 60 jumping shit plats. Like, I just don't get the point? Whitelist all of them.

 

Personally, I would rather support the community that has worked hard to restore these servers - (which has undoubtedly been done more for the love of the games and commitment to preserving legacy games, and NOT for the purpose of popping a few non-legit trophies) - than the shovelware developers that flood the store with thousands of non-legit trophies every fucking week.

Edited January 29 by diskdocx

[HaserPL]

3 hours ago, diskdocx said:

But this really applies to any hacked trophies. I'm not sure how the CRT detects that.

If the timestamps are correct, there is no way to detect this. Unless the player base is so dedicated/obsessed, that they will go through the leaderboards just to verify if the trophy's achiever really did the task, like with Time Crisis Razing Storm or Crypt of the Necrodancer (yes people actually do this).

[Johambubger]

So, as someone who doesn't care about the leaderboards - what consequence will it have for me if I were to play on a server like this and pop trophies for my own enjoyment? I care about the rest of my account, like seeing the list of games I've played, and the rarities and stuff. What features would be removed for me if I was 'flagged' or whatever?

[DaivRules]

24 minutes ago, BEARDLESSVlKlNG said:

So, as someone who doesn't care about the leaderboards - what consequence will it have for me if I were to play on a server like this and pop trophies for my own enjoyment? I care about the rest of my account, like seeing the list of games I've played, and the rarities and stuff. What features would be removed for me if I was 'flagged' or whatever?

You wouldn’t appear on leaderboards. All other functions would not be impacted. 

[pinkrobot_pb]

33 minutes ago, DaivRules said:

You wouldn’t appear on leaderboards. All other functions would not be impacted. 

 

You would also be regarded as very suspicious by a lot of other users of this website. You would very likely have a worse time on these forums or when trying to join gaming sessions. This already comes with having a blue H on your profile and is worse when you have been kicked off the leaderboards by the CRT.

 

It's a tradeoff that is personal and needs careful consideration.

[DaivRules]

1 minute ago, pinkrobot_pb said:

 

You would also be regarded as very suspicious by a lot of other users of this website. You would very likely have a worse time on these forums or when trying to join gaming sessions. This already comes with having a blue H on your profile and is worse when you have been kicked off the leaderboards by the CRT.

 

It's a tradeoff that is personal and needs careful consideration.

Those have nothing to do with “what features would be removed” and more to do with people will be people. Ignorance is everywhere, let people explain how ignorant they are and then avoid them. 
 

The people who give them a hard time in the forums should be reported for breaking rule number 3 and is much more limited then you’re implying. 
 

[xXRathlosXx]

14 hours ago, DaivRules said:

People who are interested in the leaderboards, are interested in the leaderboards, and any leaderboard has it’s applicable rules, as do the leaderboards here. If leaderboards are of no interest, people can just opt out by not looking at them, as many members here choose to do. 
 

People are free to play whatever games they choose in whatever manner they choose, but if they want their profile to participate (meaning appear) in the leaderboards here on this one site, then the trophies on their profile have to meet the sites leaderboard rules. 
 

 

 

Thanks for the reply. That was much-needed clarification.

 

4 minutes ago, DaivRules said:

You wouldn’t appear on leaderboards. All other functions would not be impacted. 

 

The more I read, the more nonsensical this topic becomes. Playing on these servers will not affect anyone who does not care about being on the leaderboards. Yet, people continue to belabor whatever point it is they have.

 

13 hours ago, DaivRules said:

If somehow the majority of the 5 million accounts vote in a poll, will that somehow compel the singular site owner and admin to decide he no longer owns his site and it’s been mutinied by members so he now is forced to abide by their will?

Do people even know this site is owned by just one person who is the only admin for the site? Are there somehow assumptions this is a community owned and run site?

 

I'll preface this by saying that I – as a former staff member – came from a gaming community with between 1.5 million and 2 million members. Concurrent users at the site's peak were around 20,000. The daily number of users at the peak was just shy of 100,000. Site traffic was high, and a large percentage of the user base was active. We also had a subscription-based membership and took in donations. G-Fuel reached out and offered us a partnership and provided us with coupon codes exclusive to members who subscribed. Despite the size and relative success, we still took suggestions. A single person owned that site as well. We never perceived suggestions from the community as mutiny.

 

The question you must ask is whether or not PSNP is a community or a quasi-governing body. Regardless of the answer you decide on, both still take suggestions from their participants.

 

I should also note that the gaming community I came from collapsed and had a schism from terrible business decisions and no longer exist.

[pinkrobot_pb]

9 minutes ago, DaivRules said:

Those have nothing to do with “what features would be removed” and more to do with people will be people. Ignorance is everywhere, let people explain how ignorant they are and then avoid them. 
 

The people who give them a hard time in the forums should be reported for breaking rule number 3 and is much more limited then you’re implying.

 

You're right, I forgot about that. You can also be excluded from many of the community events. Thanks!

[DaivRules]

2 minutes ago, xXRathlosXx said:

Despite the size and relative success, we still took suggestions. A single person owned that site as well. We never perceived suggestions from the community as mutiny.

This site DID take the suggestion when it was first presented, which is why custom servers ARE accepted on conditions that keep them in line with the existing leaderboards rules. My referral to the mutiny exaggeration was reference to disbanding the Cheater Removers (Leaderboard rule enforcers) over this very small situation. 
 

There is a lot of misrepresentation you’re taking at face value if you’re not taking the time to actually examine the specifics of what’s being discussed here and the decade+ of examples that this site HAS accepted because the community brought them up. 
 

10 minutes ago, pinkrobot_pb said:

 

You're right, I forgot about that. You can also be excluded from many of the community events. Thanks!

Im curious which Community Events required a leaderboard rank and/or no hidden trophies and what sense that made other than prejudice.