Profile Rating Replacing Leaderboards?

[amurnin100]

So hear me out and I’ve not thought everything through but here is my idea to resolve the leaderboards issue.

 

All profiles will have a 0.0 - 10.0 rating depending on rarity trophies , shovelware and number of platinums.

 

Cheated games will have a detrimental effect on their profile score, shovel plats can have a small effect singularly but collectively they can bring their score down too.

 

Ultra rare plats will boost their score and I was thinking, but it can be displayed on their trophy profile page and colour coded (0.0 being red - 10.0 being bright green.

 

This way people can see the quality of each profile and come to their own conclusions.

 

Essentially is it like a credit rating but tailored to cover all issues regarded the affect issues above

 

 

 

Edited October 21, 2023 by amurnin100

[diskdocx]

This is just another rarity leaderboard, with arbitrary calculations thrown in.

 

Short answer - no.

 

Longer answer - play what you want, the leaderboard is meaningless.

[NathanielJohn]

22 minutes ago, amurnin100 said:

This way people can see the quality of each profile and come to their own conclusions.

Come to their own conclusions after being told the “quality” of a profile?

 

This might be a fine vague idea, but you’re never going to come up with a concrete suggestion (e.g., an actual formula for the quality score) that people are happy with. Trying to put a number on something that is that subjective is a recipe for disaster.

 

I’m all for more stats, but those stats have to actually mean something. Leaderboard position has a specific meaning. Number of ultra rares has a specific meaning. Completion percentage has a specific meaning. Combining those (and other stats) in some subjective way to create a “score” removes that meaning: I don’t know what a score of 7.2/10 actually means beyond “that’s a kinda good number, right?”

Edited October 21, 2023 by NathanielJohn

[ChuckieH]

I like your idea. Sometimes I think about stuff like this. One of my doubts is how to treat situations like this: player A have 10 ultra-rare plats. Player B have the same ultra-rares, but also a shovelware. In other words, should a ranking or rating like this focus in everything the player did or just in the "positive" stuff? Should the shovelware impact negative or impact zero?

[Riiszk]

I understand what you're trying to do, and I really want you to say something that makes me agree with you because I too dislike the sight of them at this point, but your system you've made has many flaws.

By your ratings, a shit, dodgy and buggy game that isn't worth the money that has a 1% platinum because of the previous reasons will give the account a better score and be seen as a more 'quality' account compared to an account that played The Last of Us Part 1 and 2, Spider Man, and God of War with their more common plats. That won't sit well with many people. If it's a rarity leaderboard you want, there already is one.

psnprofiles.com/leaderboard/rarity

 

Another thing, if you then wanted to say 'well, rarity AND game review ratings is what decides the score', you're saying that quality is deemed on a review score and not what the individual thinks a game is worth. How good games are is subjective, not objective and therefore shouldn't lower someone's profile quality if the game they love isn't rated highly or have a rare plat.

 

The only part I agree with is cheating reduces the account quality.

 

Like I said though, I want you to make me agree because the current state is ass (but logical). I hope you come up with a good system.

Edited October 21, 2023 by Riiszk

[HaserPL]

would a person with necrodancer and like 5 plats in total be at the bottom of the leaderboard, just because they didn't play anything else? not really accurate, as other leaderboards to be honest

[HuntingFever]

15 minutes ago, diskdocx said:

This is just another rarity leaderboard, with arbitrary calculations thrown in.

 

Short answer - no.

 

Longer answer - play what you want, the leaderboard is meaningless.

This^

 

IMO, Leaderboards are more useless and meaningless in this day and age than a Chocolate Teapot in the middle of a desert on a hot day.

[ThatMuttGuy]

Awful idea that would promote some serious elitist mindsets (moreso than already now).

 

Every thread would result in "well why would anyone listen to what a 2.0 profile has to say??" etc.

 

And I say this as someone that doesn't play shovelware. 

[diskdocx]

24 minutes ago, NathanielJohn said:

Come to their own conclusions after being told the “quality” of a profile?

 

This might be a fine vague idea, but you’re never going to come up with a concrete suggestion (e.g., an actual formula for the quality score) that people are happy with. Trying to put a number on something that is that subjective is a recipe for disaster.

 

I’m all for more stats, but those stats have to actually mean something. Leaderboard position has a specific meaning. Number of ultra rares has a specific meaning. Completion percentage has a specific meaning. Combining those (and other stats) in some subjective way to create a “score” removes that meaning: I don’t know what a score of 7.2/10 actually means beyond “that’s a kinda good number, right?”

The biggest problem is the stats here already don't mean anything. Rarity here is completely arbitrary. PS3 games and plats are considerably more rare since the site used to routinely update all profiles, but now it no longer does. So you have these legacy games that are now dormant profiles - which may actually have completed those games, or added numerous new games that are no longer tracked.

 

By paring down the userbase to only active members, we create much more inflated completion percentages. I mean compare a relatively popular recent AAA game like the first Spider-man - it has a 42.9% completion on this site (bordering on 'shovelware' territory) compared to only 8.4% on PSN itself.

 

And then lets have a conversation about the absolutely asinine rarity calculations for DLC, which was all because the ultra rare purists here felt that too many URs were being earned just by completing DLC.

 

Rarity here is a relatively useless metric.

[KenjiCBZ]

There's already the average rarity stat.

[JohnCenaSong-]

I honestly get bored by all the different leaderboard and rating suggestions for profiles and the various different metrics people use to try and judge who has the 'better' profile. Especially with all the elitism that comes along with it.

 

I get it, the shovelware epidemic has taken over the leaderboard but ultimately the leaderboard was only ever a measure of who has the most trophies in a quantity sense to begin with and it's the only real objective measure we will truly have for measuring trophy hunting.

 

Sure, shovelware is awful now but those climbing the ranks back in the day weren't doing so by sinking hours into long RPGs and hard as nails games, they were playing kids movie games, Hannah Montana, Terminator Salvation, skipping through expensive visual novels etc. It's effectively the same game to rank up fast now as then, the path of least resistance.

 

Nothing has changed with the leaderboards realistically aside from people who seem to care more about them than they'd admit not being motivated enough (thanks to shovelware burnout) to earn those higher spots by playing by the rules that have always been and so want to bend the metrics to suit how they want to play.

 

If you can't or don't want to compete that way, don't. Just play and earn trophies the way you want to and ignore the global leaderboard. Enough of these 'alternative' and totally subjective ways to measure the 'quality' and 'prestige' of someone's trophy list.

[Wild-Arms-R]

2 minutes ago, KenjiCBZ said:

There's already the average rarity stat.

This.

 

Why doesn't the owner have it return to a profiles front page again.

In it's place we have the useless and unneeded average trophy per day count. 

 

This alone would actually help lot just my opinion.

Edited October 21, 2023 by Wild-Arms-R

[iriihutoR84]

I'm all for secondary leaderboards not counting shovelware and/or stacks but this just nurtures elitism and bullying. It reminds me of forcing jew stars on people to show that they are inferior. A badge of shame. 

 

I don't mind a statistic like average trophy rarity being displayed on your profile page but giving profiles a rating and displaying "good" profiles as green and "bad" profiles as red is telling people that they are not allowed to play whatever they want.

[Wild-Arms-R]

12 minutes ago, iriihutoR84 said:

I'm all for secondary leaderboards not counting shovelware and/or stacks but this just nurtures elitism and bullying. It reminds me of forcing jew stars on people to show that they are inferior. A badge of shame. 

 

I don't mind a statistic like average trophy rarity being displayed on your profile page but giving profiles a rating and displaying "good" profiles as green and "bad" profiles as red is telling people that they are not allowed to play whatever they want.

I agree, I think we're all really past this point about thinking that spending our free time playing "harder" games then others should mean that we need to be label as better.

It's honestly pretty childish and kinda sad if anyone really thinks this still. 

 

To further echo what some here have already said.

Just play want you want, most importantly play for you and stop letting trophies dictate how and why you play your video games.

Edited October 21, 2023 by Wild-Arms-R

[RetroFeniks]

If I wanted a social credit score there would be other options I could go for. 

[D-E-U-S-X]

Who would it hurt to have Average Rarity back on the profile page?

Although it also gives me a quick insight into a profile to compare the ratio of the respective trophies, for example:

2,5 times higher than

3 times higher then

4 times higher then

These are the statistics from my profile, but should not be considered representative.

[DrBloodmoney]

That’s what gaming has been missing all along - all the fun of a credit check! 😂

 

But seriously…

…while I don’t really care either way, I do question who exactly such a metric would realistically serve.

 

I mean, folks who play games for fun, and see thier profile as an extension of that, won’t care what their “credit score” is any more than they currently care what anyone thinks of their profile generally…

 

…and the people who play games as a means to judge other people via their profiles, in order to feel a sense of superiority to them, already do.

They don’t need a “credit score” to do that - they do it anyways. 

Edited October 21, 2023 by DrBloodmoney

[melodicmizery]

shovelware for life, ftw! seriously just dont look at the leaderboards. i spend 1 or 2 days on a flash sale of shovelware games. and then ill spend a entire month on one game. nobody cares about the 100 hour difference they just get mad that its alot of fast plats and automatically cancel out the games i put alot of time in boosting or playing 100 hours. complain to companies that charge so much for dlc and double season passes and ill be more inclined to play more bigger games. 

[Burritoprime]

It doesn't matter how good or bad an idea for anything regarding leaderboard is, it won't change and Sly will not take it into account for a myriad or reasons, really don't see the point in these topics, take it or leave it.

Edited October 21, 2023 by Burritoprime

[amurnin100]

It’s clear folks this was a silly idea, ill close this but thank you all for your constructive criticism