Genuine Ratings

[LDN-Legend]

Consistently I have noticed that the rating for games on PSNP are quite off. Even changed over time where people forget the struggles they endured and claim games to be 'Easy' only after learning the mechanics and becoming good at the game. I feel as though there needs to be more context into difficulty ratings of games. Some are over rated, some underrated. There should be context and data that this rating is based upon. The "Average" player is by no means a seasoned trophy hunter. 

 

TLDR: Trophy difficulty ratings are subjective and should be more objective.

 

 

The problem seems to be that the people deciding the ratings forgot the struggles they endured to becomes good enough at the game to write guides and be pro at it - Then it all just seems easy. We need to consider the average player, not what a pro rated a game. ? 

Edited April 11 by LDN-Legend

[ThatMuttGuy]

All ratings are pretty subjective. Some people might find a specific game easier than another (especially if they have experience in a genre). Someone who comes from a fighting game background will probably not struggle as much with fighting games and is more likely to write a guide for a fighting game. So, just because they say it's easy or medium doesn't mean someone with no fighting experience won't find it hard.

 

I find that this site (and trophy hunters in general) are too obsessed with these guide ratings. Instead of seeing what rating a guide author gives a game, look into the information on why it's rated that way in the guide. It's more work, but I find you can assess difficulty more accurately than a simple number system.

 

And finally, I think 90% of games can be completed by anyone. You just need persistence for some of the harder ones.

 

[DaivRules]

22 minutes ago, LDN-Legend said:

TLDR: Trophy difficulty ratings are subjective and should be more objective.

 

I'm the only one I know that actually put out an objective difficulty rating scale.

 

Perhaps starting what how you objectively rate difficulty will help everyone consolidate on where they agree or where they would suggest changes.
 

[Jeanolt]

True, I also find the obsession with that number really weird.

 

A month ago a game I really liked got an incredible guide, and instead of talking about it, people were discussing the difficulty and time. 

 

That number won't change your experience at all. You can even look up sites like howlongtobeat to know an approximate.

Edited April 11 by Jeanolt

[GothGirlMaxine]

Indeed, difficulty is subjective, given some people will have more or less experience or skill in a particular game, series or genre. As a guide writer, it can be tricky to find that right number, not necessarily for the individual(s) writing the guide but for anyone viewing it. 

[DanteIshimura]

If I was in the games media and had to rate games I would simply work of the bad, good, excellent scoring. All this 7.2 and 3.9 is a pile of arse. 

 

But what I would also do is have two people score the game. Someone that loves the genre and someone that doesn't. So for example, some would give GTAV a rating of excellent, but the none genre fan would also see how much has been put into the game and may also rate it good or excellent. But then you have something like sim city and a fan would rate it excellent but a none genre fan would give it bad due to not enjoying it from a gameplay experience. Perhaps a little not for each rating of why they were given. 

[LDN-Legend]

11 hours ago, DaivRules said:

 

I'm the only one I know that actually put out an objective difficulty rating scale.

 

 

This is most in line with what i was hoping to see. Some kind of objective rating scale, including length of game, bosses, puzzles, availability of guides etc. (Just some random factors that could be included as examples). A voting system would be quite interesting to see too. Would be nice to see some new features added to this aging site. 

 

Like does the game require a speed run? that would be + difficulty

 

Edited April 12 by LDN-Legend

[DrBloodmoney]

I think the solution isn't to try and make ratings "objective", since objectivity is impossible with something so user-specific...

....but instead to lean into that subjectivity, and take it as read that player experience is different, by making difficulty ratings comparative rather than absolute.

 

What I mean by that is, there's actually very little value to trying to come up with a "median" rating that accounts for people who are genre experts, people wholly new to a genre, and everyone in between...

...because basically all ratings normalise down or up - you end up with a 1-10 difficulty scale that essentially places all but the most extreme games in a defacto 1-4 range, because virtually all non-extreme games end up between 4/10 and 8/10.

 

 

What would be more useful to a broader swathe of people, would be to use a "More Than / Less Than" scale, via two other games in the same genre.

 

So, for example, instead of a guide saying, say:

 

 "Dark Souls:  

6/10"

 

which is arbitrary,

have it say:

 

"Dark Souls:

Easier Than: Sekiro

Harder Than: Lords of the Fallen"

 

That way, it is not a subject to the differences in player skill or player experience.

 

Some folks who are very good at souls games will find it easier, but they would probably still agree that it is easier/harder than the two chosen comparisons, and folks who find souls games hard would know it's gonna be tough for them, but tougher than one, and not as tough as the other.

 

Players can still gauge roughly where the game sits within its genre, however, what they are presented with allows them valuable info, without it skewing towards either genre experts, or genre novices. They know themselves where they stand with regards to a specific genre, but they get a sense of where that game sits within that genre, and can interpret what that means to them for their own personal skill level within that genre.

Edited April 12 by DrBloodmoney

[Dry]

12 hours ago, LDN-Legend said:

TLDR: Trophy difficulty ratings are subjective and should be more objective.

 

That's right.

 

For example, this place's trophy guide on the Klonoa: Phantasy Reverie Series is at a 3 out of 10 difficulty rating when I think it should be a 5 out of 10 simply due to:

1. The unnecessarily strict timed puzzles in Vision 6-2: The Time Of Restoration ~The Prism Corridor~
2. The EXTRA VISION
3. The Chamber o'Horrors

Otherwise I'd agree completely with the guide author's provided difficulty rating.

Edited April 12 by Dry

[GothGirlMaxine]

2 hours ago, LDN-Legend said:

This is most in line with what i was hoping to see. Some kind of objective rating scale, including length of game, bosses, puzzles, availability of guides etc. (Just some random factors that could be included as examples). A voting system would be quite interesting to see too. Would be nice to see some new features added to this aging site. 

 

Like does the game require a speed run? that would be + difficulty

This thread has inspired me to add something related to this topic into a guide for the site I am currently working on, so thank you for this. 

[DaivRules]

2 hours ago, LDN-Legend said:

 

This is most in line with what i was hoping to see. Some kind of objective rating scale, including length of game, bosses, puzzles, availability of guides etc. (Just some random factors that could be included as examples). A voting system would be quite interesting to see too. Would be nice to see some new features added to this aging site. 

 

Like does the game require a speed run? that would be + difficulty

 

I was hoping you would actually propose a framework instead of everyone expecting someone else to do it for them. 
 

Here’s what I came up with 5 years ago for a completely objective difficulty rating scale:

 

DDS v 1.0 (April 2019)

• Time limited (+1)
  • Modifiers
    • Near perfect/Perfect Run required (+1)
    • Glitches/exploits for Time Limited requirement (-1)
• Fast Reflexes Required (+1)
  • Modifiers
    • 3 Simultaneous buttons required (+1)
    • 4 Simultaneous buttons required (+1)
    • Sustained reflexes required for 7+ seconds (+1)
• Instant Death/No Healthbar (+1)
  • Modifier
    • Level/Progress Reset when killed (+1)
• Multiplayer Coordination Required (+1)

Things that are not considered Difficult. Spending time is not a challenge so these do not contribute to the Difficulty rating.

• Grinding (XP, Etc)
• Collectibles (No matter the quantity)
• Puzzles that have solutions available online
• Random/Luck-based *anything*
• Multiple Playthroughs

 

 

[LDN-Legend]

@DrBloodmoney I appreciate this comprehensive reply. You have obviously put a lot of thought into this yourself. I very much understand the genre specific skills and the idea of comparing games in similar genres sounds like a great proposal, however further factors still need to be taken into account. FFX-2 is rated as a higher difficulty than FFX. It would be so - If it wasn't for the lightning dodging trophy in FFX which single-handedly makes the game difficult. Similarly to the skipping rope challenge in FFIX. Furthermore, it would be nice for a non genre expert to have an idea at the difficulty rating; Which may be different to that set by a genre expert. (Amateur Rating Vs Pro Rating)

 

@Dry- This is my point, there's often some smaller challenges or niche trophies which are overlooked or forgotten when deciding the overall rating. 

 

@GothGirlMaxine - It's nice to see other people are thinking along the same lines. Feel free to share an insight on what you're working on?

 

@DaivRules - It looks like you have thought of even more complex ideas than myself. I wouldn't say i proposed a real framework, just shot some ideas out. It's great to see your contribution and that you seem to agree on a more objective system being in place. I would go as far as to change some things though, like if a speed run has glitches etc which help, maybe not reduce it by 100% but 0.5 or something. After all some speed runs almost expect you to use 'Tricks'. Also spending time on things that 'aren't a challenge' often requires some form of perseverance depending on the grind. Which could be accredited to an extent? I understand how it may not be deemed difficult, but I hear AC games are notorious for collectibles for example, surely it deserves something. 

 

 

Appreciate all of the replies and different perspectives on the idea!

Edited April 12 by LDN-Legend

[val_blanc]

I often look at the actual trophy list, and look for trophies like 1,000,000kills, Complete on Super Mega Hard difficulty, speed runs and the like. Or check the not-platinum with the lowest%. Discussions on these trophies are usually what gives most realistic difficulty for me. 

 

Guide estimates are often very off, in difficulty and completion time. Or rather it expects you to follow guide from beginning to end, and for you to skip all cutscenes. Which obviously doesn't work for everyone. 

 

14 hours ago, ThatMuttGuy said:

 

And finally, I think 90% of games can be completed by anyone. You just need persistence for some of the harder ones.

 

I still surprise myself that I completed Sekiro lol.

[DaivRules]

20 minutes ago, LDN-Legend said:

Also spending time on things that 'aren't a challenge' often requires some form of perseverance depending on the grind. Which could be accredited to an extent?

Can that be objectively measured though? Aren’t you straying from your intention of being objective if you can’t quantify it? Is perseverance in your example merely the passing of time, which falls outside of difficult and for some is more accurately labeled as annoying?

 

Using a number should be the result of a repeatable measurement if you want to remain objective. And it would be pivotal to define, specifically, what the word difficulty means so it can exclude the things that can’t be objectively measured and focus on what can be. If any part of the word comes down to how someone feels, the objectivity goes right out the window. 
 

[LancashireLad87]

15 hours ago, LDN-Legend said:

Consistently I have noticed that the rating for games on PSNP are quite off. Even changed over time where people forget the struggles they endured and claim games to be 'Easy' only after learning the mechanics and becoming good at the game. I feel as though there needs to be more context into difficulty ratings of games. Some are over rated, some underrated. There should be context and data that this rating is based upon. The "Average" player is by no means a seasoned trophy hunter. 

 

TLDR: Trophy difficulty ratings are subjective and should be more objective.

 

 

The problem seems to be that the people deciding the ratings forgot the struggles they endured to becomes good enough at the game to write guides and be pro at it - Then it all just seems easy. We need to consider the average player, not what a pro rated a game. ? 

 

To begin I'll explain the part I've highlighted in Blue. From my experience guide writers for the overwhelming majority are not pro at the game they write about, they're merely trophy competent. A professional player would destroy the recommended hours based on the guide writers estimates, a good example would be Tony Hawk Pro Skater 1+2 Remake. The guide estimates a 70 hour platinum journey whilst legitimate top players such as AndyTHPS on YouTube would smash that platinum in sub 15 hours no problem. 

 

Its difficulty to please everyone when it comes to difficulty ratings, I've personally shared my opinions on a number of guides regarding their ratings with mixed success. Sometimes the author acknowledges it and decides to change it or they delete the comment because constructive criticism regarding difficulty is difficult to comprehend. Genre experience is invaluable, what you grew up playing as a kid will contribute to the genres you can adapt and overcome in a short period of time whilst less practiced/proficient genres will pose a greater challenge.

 

I recently played Nioh 2 to virtually 100% completion solo and that game was significantly harder than any souls-like I've played before it, and yet the difficulty is rated a 5/10 for the platinum, which is probably due to co-operative play or being carried by someone who can steamroll through the game for you. 

[VigilantCrow]

I just use my own flowchart to determine difficulty. Makes it consistent, removes bias and I'm relying on objective fact, instead of opinion.

 

Very first true/false flag is "If a controller was put in the hands of a Games Journalist, could they be expected to plat this game".

If true, the game is an immediate 1/10 difficulty.

 

Edited April 12 by VigilantCrow

[Vern3r0z]

this is why i like the difficulty/time needed polls on PST. Although there are always lot of troll 10's at least you get some idea of the games difficulty.

[ThatMuttGuy]

20 minutes ago, Vern3r0z said:

this is why i like the difficulty/time needed polls on PST. Although there are always lot of troll 10's at least you get some idea of the games difficulty.

 

Imo that's absolutely worthless. Unless you can restrict it to only people that have gotten the platinum, people will vote that have no idea how easy or hard a game is. 

 

Trophy hunters really should stop letting others dictate difficulty for them. For me, I don't even factor in a difficulty rating from a guide because the author's experience may be vastly different from mine. 

 

I will always be of the opinion that the platinum percentage is more accurate in most cases (although not always and ps+ skews this certainly). 

[Breakingthegreen]

Another factor you'd have to bear in mind would be the guide's effect on the difficulty, if there was a puzzle game whose guide was a walkthrough of each puzzle, should that game have a difficulty rating of "1/10?" Perhaps.

 

Whenever I've written a guide I've always made my difficulty ratings based on the assumption that the player is using the guide.

[KenjiCBZ]

I don't understand why there isn't for every game a poll where everyone who got at least a good 75% of the Trophies can give a difficult rating.

[DaivRules]

5 minutes ago, KenjiCBZ said:

I don't understand why there isn't for every game a poll where everyone who got at least a good 75% of the Trophies can give a difficult rating.

Because for everyone who thinks that’s a great system for difficulty ratings they agree with, there is someone else who thinks that system isn’t any better than spinning a wheel to randomly determine a difficulty. 
 

 

[DrBloodmoney]

1 hour ago, LancashireLad87 said:

The guide estimates a 70 hour platinum journey whilst legitimate top players such as AndyTHPS on YouTube would smash that platinum in sub 15 hours no problem. 

 

That's a point - and the crux of the issue with difficulty ratings...

...though when it comes to those level of extremes I do think there is some validity to the following question:

 

Who cares what an "elite player" of that kind of level rates a game?

 

 

That might sound flippant, but it's not meant to - it's a serious question - what value is the difficulty rating of someone that far outside of the regular grading curve to the majority of people who might legitimately be looking for a reasonable estimate via a PSNP guide?

 

Someone on that level that isn't going to need a rating on a guide to tell them anything - hell, they are highly unlikely to need a guide in any capacity - so why would their personal difficulty rating have any value to anyone else?

 

The flip-side to that would be someone with so little knowledge of gaming, that they hadn't even mastered holding a controller or duel-stick controls - they might rate something like an FPS at like an 8/10 or a 9/10.... but that rating isn't really of value to anyone who might be on this site.

 

[JohnCenaSong-]

52 minutes ago, KenjiCBZ said:

I don't understand why there isn't for every game a poll where everyone who got at least a good 75% of the Trophies can give a difficult rating.

This is the kind of idea I support but people seem to pick holes in it to the point where it feels like 'if it's not perfect, just don't bother'. User rating have numerous flaws, as we see countless times with user reviews. But, the general idea of having something give an indication of consensus I think is at least better than the alternative of fixating on one score set by one person which will vary wildly depending on which individual it was who wrote the guide. I've seen resistance to it on TrueTrophies despite the fact they already have a voting system for completion time, which would have all the same flaws, but they seem happy to accept it for that and not for difficulty. I can understand considering it not worth the hassle or to think it's a tad useless but I'll never understand why people would be so strongly opposing to a voting system, how is it any worse than what currently exists?

 

Sometimes a fixed single score can be easy to follow when they're all tied to the same individual. For example, if you follow a specific reviewer you get an idea of how they score their games. Guides here however are not all from the same author, just like big review websites have multiple reviewers working for them. It feels just as worthless to me as taking an IGN score and running with it as if it's some objective fact on the games quality . Not that I would take the Metacritic score or user score as absolutist indicators either, but at least it can show some element on consistency and consensus if large %ages of reviewers and/or the community be giving something 9/10 etc.

 

Generally though I think the obsession with difficulty ratings needs to go away in the same way as the obsession with review scores. But having a helpful guideline of consensus can be useful for some, though I'd argue that I'd much rather come to conclusions based on comments about difficulty (as with game quality) than an arbitrary number as it provides much needed context and allows me to decipher for myself how any of it would apply to me. A number can't do that.

 

With comments, I'd probably also lean into this kind of idea:

5 hours ago, DrBloodmoney said:

What would be more useful to a broader swathe of people, would be to use a "More Than / Less Than" scale, via two other games in the same genre.

 

So, for example, instead of a guide saying, say:

 

 "Dark Souls:  

6/10"

 

which is arbitrary,

have it say:

 

"Dark Souls:

Easier Than: Sekiro

Harder Than: Lords of the Fallen"

By being comparative to games that are similar you can give a good idea to people who may have experienced one of the other games where it might likely sit for them. It too is not perfect, but ranking subjective experiences never will be.

[sepheroithisgod]

I still think we should have a community platinum difficulty poll where users who have earned the platinum can leave a score. Put it alongside the guide score so people have multiple points of reference.

[Vern3r0z]

2 hours ago, ThatMuttGuy said:

 

Imo that's absolutely worthless. Unless you can restrict it to only people that have gotten the platinum, people will vote that have no idea how easy or hard a game is. 

 

Trophy hunters really should stop letting others dictate difficulty for them. For me, I don't even factor in a difficulty rating from a guide because the author's experience may be vastly different from mine. 

 

I will always be of the opinion that the platinum percentage is more accurate in most cases (although not always and ps+ skews this certainly). 

It is useful for games that have no guides anywhere. At least some inkling of difficulty is nice to have.