Project Platinum: General info and leaderboard

[Kevvik]

On 8/15/2017 at 1:58 PM, Leon Castle said:

by way I prefer the Black to Platinum rank rule as the awards are my motivation to do PPs.

 

11 hours ago, Dragon-Archon said:

If it's up to voting, I prefer the Black, Bronze, Silver, Gold, and Platinum emblems myself. 

 

8 hours ago, Lucas said:

Same goes for me.

 

7 hours ago, Satoshi Ookami said:

I would also leave the ranks as they are now. Imo Black Ranks aren't that big of a problem.

From my experiences, most people join PP with at least one game cleared.

Or at worst with game they already started or plan to play soon.

 

Agree with this myself.  

 

3 hours ago, soultaker655 said:

Before anything else though, I will say that regardless if PP changes or stays the same I feel it will always die out due to the general lack of effort on everyone who's involved in PP part, from the admins to the participants.

 

I mean A lot of people are saying the leaderboard disappearing was a big factor for them, when the fact is the leaderboard didn't disappear, it's just that the automated leaderboard disappeared. The 3.0 leaderboard could work just fine. All people should do is count their own scores and put them up. If people really cared about the competitive spirit and stuff like then they wouldn't cheat or anything like that.

 

Saying that PP died because the leaderboard disappeared when people didn’t even put the effort in to try to use the 3.0 leaderboard shows that most didn't even care about the leaderboard unless it was done for them. Which shows a lack of effort and how little most of the participants cared about the leaderboard. Only 3 people out of the original top 10 have even tried to use the 3.0 leaderboard and most of the admins (all of which know how the leaderboard works) are not in the 3.0 leaderboard.

 

With that out of the way, I will say how I would change PP to try and refresh it:

1. The rule which says a PP needs at least five games would be changed to 4. This would allow certain series that have been stuck in the 4-game limbo for a while to just have a PP by themselves.
2. I would change the scoring system from a 4-point scoring system to a two-point scoring system. This is mainly due to change number 1, because if certain PP’s only have four games that you needed to plat in order to get 12 leaderboard points, deep down this would cause some frustration to some people because it would seem like people are gaming the leaderboard by focusing on PP with a low amount of games. With the scoring system, I talked about in an earlier post it would cut out the chances of that a little and stop certain scores from being completely out of control.
3. Any series that's in a mixed bag that has more than four games would be separated into its own PP that is run by the admin of the mixed bag unless they pass it on to someone else. While this may upset some of the admins, having certain PPs just really huge due to full series just sitting in there, kind of ruins the whole leaderboard thing and only leads to people losing interest in that PP.
4. A Rule where people would have to show interest in the PP they are in stay in the hall of fame or leaderboard. This would be by either continuing to rank up or by posting your thoughts on each game as you finish them or by simply checking in and saying hey I'm still interested in this I just been playing other games. I know that rule seem kind of mean or unnecessary because it would just be used to exclude people, but the fact is, if people don't really have interest in the series and are just looking to be to use PP as a checklist or whatever they're not really adding to the Group or Community of PP. Nothing would stop them from using the emblems they earned they just wouldn’t be in the hall of fame or leaderboard. How long is to long without saying anything would be up to the admin of the PP they joined and of course if they are plat rank they don’t really have to say much since they are done.
5. No stacks would be needed for normal plat rank, but could be used for super plat rank.
6. I would get rid of the genre and company rule. Because PPs like the metroidvania are good PPs that people seem to enjoy and certain games really should just be with the other games from the company that made them like the Telltale games. That doesn't mean there should be stuff like a Blizzard PP or Activation TP, but certain games just fit better with the other games from their company or genre.

These are just the ideas I have that could refresh PP, doesn't mean they should be used and it doesn't mean they can't be used. But regardless of what changes are made, without effort from all participants of the pp community, PP will just slowly die off. Because like I said in an earlier post, as it currently stands PP is just a checklist and it will just stay a checklist unless people actually want it to be more than that.

 

Outside of changing the rank/scoring structure, I agree with a lot of this.  More stepping stones for rewards with less intimidation for those who don't necessarily own many of the titles at present, especially PP's of 10 games+ (3 of the 4 that I monitor).  You can pick them up here and there on sales and still advance slowly.

 

I don't mind the smaller PP's at 4 titles.  This could potentially break up some of the really large PP's into multiples since a few have just been waiting for that 5th title to go solo.  I agree that the 12 point system seems unfair for the smaller PP's but 5 really isn't much different using the current scoring matrix.  With the larger PP's, those points really feel earned.  Changing to a 4 point matrix doesn't encourage anyone to finish the larger PPs, just the smaller ones if points are all that are desired.  I'm not sure how to find a balance on this.

 

I also rely on users to suggest new games for inclusion in the PPs that I watch over as with Metroidvania and Way of the Sword, the theme is the thing.  While Hitman and LEGO are fairly intuitive on what gets included, Metroidvania has added 1 platinum title following user feedback as well as several 100% games for the super plat rank.  I don't follow new games as much as I used to.  With work, RL and playing my own games, its hard to follow new stuff while using my time to work on older titles.  Adding to the themed PPs is really about the community and with that PP I have found interested players.  Less so for Way of the Sword which is not overly active (no one currently past silver rank) though I hope to start moving myself up soon as I have gotten several of the older titles as I figure I should start leading the way and maybe others will follow.  Overall, I find some PP communities are more involved than others.

 

I think that we need to find a way to encourage people to advance as well as some just "impulse buy" into the PP with one title but have no real interest in getting into any of the others. I saw a small surge like this from Severed for Way of the Sword but little from anyone else since.  With larger PPs, it might be worth it to increase the base for bronze to 2 games, with black covering 0-1 titles, but I'm not sure whether that is the right way to go either.

 

I try to keep the leaderboards updated and have also inputted a lot into Jem12345 's automated scoresheet (which was a heck of a lot of work and still needs some more) but the 3.0 was functional for anyone who really wanted to post their scores.  I agree leaderboards can use a bit of effort from both sides, the admins and the users.

 

Not sure how much I'm adding to the conversation but that's my cent-and-a-half worth. 

 

 

[Wavergray]

@Kevvik just you expressing your opinion adds to the conversation.

Edited August 16, 2017 by soultaker655

[OmegaFenron]

Here's my thoughts on the points that have been raised.

1. I think the 4 game rule would work and could encourage people to progress more. Also if the huge PPs were to be split up as a result it would definitly be less daunting to try and rank up as well as allowing people to be able to realisticly own all the games.

 

2. I think the points system should remain the same as the steps between ranks seem closer to obtainable so more people would attempt to rank up.

 

3. I think mixed bag PPs are fine but should have rules so they don't get out of hand.

 

4. I don't think people should be forced to contribute to the threads. I have become less active in the forums over the last few months as my PC is currently broken and I don't like using my phone for the forums so others might have their own reasons as well.

 

5. I agree that stacking should not be mandatory but isn't this already a rule?

 

6. I'm not actually sure what the genre/company rule is.

[LeetWolf2]

8 hours ago, soultaker655 said:

With that out of the way, I will say how I would change PP to try and refresh it:

1. The rule which says a PP needs at least five games would be changed to 4. This would allow certain series that have been stuck in the 4-game limbo for a while to just have a PP by themselves.
2. I would change the scoring system from a 4-point scoring system to a two-point scoring system. This is mainly due to change number 1, because if certain PP’s only have four games that you needed to plat in order to get 12 leaderboard points, deep down this would cause some frustration to some people because it would seem like people are gaming the leaderboard by focusing on PP with a low amount of games. With the scoring system, I talked about in an earlier post it would cut out the chances of that a little and stop certain scores from being completely out of control.
3. Any series that's in a mixed bag that has more than four games would be separated into its own PP that is run by the admin of the mixed bag unless they pass it on to someone else. While this may upset some of the admins, having certain PPs just really huge due to full series just sitting in there, kind of ruins the whole leaderboard thing and only leads to people losing interest in that PP.
4. A Rule where people would have to show interest in the PP they are in stay in the hall of fame or leaderboard. This would be by either continuing to rank up or by posting your thoughts on each game as you finish them or by simply checking in and saying hey I'm still interested in this I just been playing other games. I know that rule seem kind of mean or unnecessary because it would just be used to exclude people, but the fact is, if people don't really have interest in the series and are just looking to be to use PP as a checklist or whatever they're not really adding to the Group or Community of PP. Nothing would stop them from using the emblems they earned they just wouldn’t be in the hall of fame or leaderboard. How long is to long without saying anything would be up to the admin of the PP they joined and of course if they are plat rank they don’t really have to say much since they are done.
5. No stacks would be needed for normal plat rank, but could be used for super plat rank.
6. I would get rid of the genre and company rule. Because PPs like the metroidvania are good PPs that people seem to enjoy and certain games really should just be with the other games from the company that made them like the Telltale games. That doesn't mean there should be stuff like a Blizzard PP or Activation TP, but certain games just fit better with the other games from their company or genre.

These are just the ideas I have that could refresh PP, doesn't mean they should be used and it doesn't mean they can't be used. But regardless of what changes are made, without effort from all participants of the pp community, PP will just slowly die off. Because like I said in an earlier post, as it currently stands PP is just a checklist and it will just stay a checklist unless people actually want it to be more than that.

1. All that will do is open up the floodgates to even more PPs being made when we already have 74 of them, only 22 of which are up to date. Increasing the quantity of the PPs is not the answer. I think we should just remove the 4 game series list altogether, as its just another distraction that PP doesn't need.
2. I never understood the 12 point system in the first place, all it does is complicate and overinflate scores on the leaderboard. A 4 point system (assuming you mean = B -1, S -2, G -3, P -4) is the simplest way to tally scores and would be a much better way of doing it. I completely agree with this point, but not because of the inclusion of the first one.

3. Again, all this will do is add even more PP threads when we already have way too many. I think there is a way of preventing PPs from having too many games included in them but this would not be a good solution.
4. This is really weird but I was genuinely thinking about this exact thing this morning. Your comment about how people need to be more active and how it should be more like a we play event is what made me start thinking about it. And I think this is the best way to do it, and to ensure the PP admin/creator is involving themselves in the same way as well. Couldn't agree with this one more.

5. I'm assuming this was already a rule but if it wasn't I'm pretty sure it was followed by everyone. I think my Spider-Man PP thread is the only one that doesn't follow the rule and that was because I asked ZoneHunter to make an exception as I love Spider-Man and the PS4 game isn't far off. Which would have replaced the stack I have. If it isn't already a rule then I agree it should be one.

6. The genre and company rule should stick as like I said before this would just open the floodgates to more PPs that we don't need. It would take away from series PPs, and a good example of this getting out of hand are both the point-and-click PP, and the choice and consequence PP. Way, way, way too many games in both of those, and that's because they're based on genre. Leeping these rules and actually enforcing them this time would ensure that this kind of thing wouldn't happen again.

I'm just going to quickly list changes I think should be made in order to improve PP (not including the ones I agreed with above):

• Close all currently inactive PP threads. Anyone interested in picking up any of them will be allowed to do so.
• Limit thread Admin/owners to 3 threads maximum.
• Limit amount of games included in each thread to 10. Any PP ideas that go beyond that would be rejected immediately.
• Limit amount of Bonus Awards to 3 as to not overwhelm participants
• Use the original version of the automated leaderboard for the time being, the decreased amount of PPs would help its load time
• Rehaul the main General Info thread and its rules and PP layout. Also keep the top 5 up to date weekly.
• Introduce a vetting process for possible PP admin/owners. We don't want people to abandon the threads like they have been.
• PP admins/owners will have to update their threads a minimum of once a week
• If ZoneHunter has no interest in being the main admin of PP, we all vote for a new person.
• The Hidden/Black award should require at least one torphy earned in a game. People can't sign up to a thread unless they have that as a minimum.
   

There's more but I can't think of any right now. In my opinion the main focuses should be less PP threads but better quality ones, everyone being active in them, everything being updated weekly and an automated leaderboard.

[Wavergray]

@LeetWolf2 While we will most likely never agree on the quality and quantity part of PP. I do agree with some of your ideas. However, I do have some questions.

 

Close all currently inactive PP threads. Anyone interested in picking up any of them will be allowed to do so.

Why would we do this? Could you Explain the reasons why you think this would help.

 

Limit amount of games included in each thread to 10. Any PP ideas that go beyond that would be rejected immediately.

Why I do understand the spirit of this idea, I see no reason to block some games from being in a PP just because there isn't enough space.

 

Limit amount of Bonus Awards to 3 as to not overwhelm participants

Bonus Awards don't really matter, they are just something a admin could add if they wanted to.

 

Also keep the top 5 up to date weekly.

Even back when PP was super active the top 5 never changed. 

 

Introduce a vetting process for possible PP admin/owners. We don't want people to abandon the threads like they have been

Most of the admins are people who where some of the most active poster on psnp. What would this vetting process look like and how would it stop people from just leaving the site.

 

PP admins/owners will have to update their threads a minimum of once a week

Why I do understand the spirit of this idea, after the PP storm stop most threads didn't get new post for months. Weekly updates only work if there are things to update.

 

If ZoneHunter has no interest in being the main admin of PP, we all vote for a new person.

I'm pretty sure @xZoneHunter is the most upset in how PP has turned out, but really it comes down to the fact that everyone likes to talk about doing stuff to help PP, but they never actually do any of that stuff. IMO Zone should stay as main Admin and maybe you and I should be the secondary/helper admins.

 

As for quality and quantity stuff, the whole idea of PP is to get people to play games, this site tracks almost 6000 games and of the current PPs maybe 200 games count as PP games. Unless we want to turn this into a "Only play these 'cool' games" club I don't think we should limit the number of PP. Sure there needs to be some quality control, but no matter how hard we try there will always be games that can be in a PP..

 

As for the leaderboard I remember @bladesoframen was working on some super leaderboard. IRL stuff most likely got in the way, but maybe we should see what he has.

[Satoshi Ookami]

25 minutes ago, soultaker655 said:

 

PP admins/owners will have to update their threads a minimum of once a week

How is this going to work for threads that have no new members, no new rank changes and are so niche no one even knows they exist?  

[Wavergray]

2 hours ago, Satoshi Ookami said:

How is this going to work for threads that have no new members, no new rank changes and are so niche no one even knows they exist?  

Why are you asking me? Ask @LeetWolf2

[Dragon-Archon]

4 hours ago, woop94 said:

I agree that stacking should not be mandatory but isn't this already a rule?

 

I'm not actually sure what the genre/company rule is.

Now it's up to the PP admin whether or not stacking is required for the plat rank. IIRC the Metal Gear PP requires stacking.

 

The genre/company rule means that all games from a series must be eligible and used when creating a PP. For example: Darksiders 1 meets the requirements for the Dragons PP, but Darksiders II didn't, so I couldn't just add the first game. In the end both of them weren't added.

 

 

Wow, so many suggestions. I'm just going to add my opinion to it

12 hours ago, soultaker655 said:

With that out of the way, I will say how I would change PP to try and refresh it:

1. The rule which says a PP needs at least five games would be changed to 4. This would allow certain series that have been stuck in the 4-game limbo for a while to just have a PP by themselves. Indifferent to the matter
2. I would change the scoring system from a 4-point scoring system to a two-point scoring system. This is mainly due to change number 1, because if certain PP’s only have four games that you needed to plat in order to get 12 leaderboard points, deep down this would cause some frustration to some people because it would seem like people are gaming the leaderboard by focusing on PP with a low amount of games. With the scoring system, I talked about in an earlier post it would cut out the chances of that a little and stop certain scores from being completely out of control. Disagree, I like how gold and platinum are worth a lot more points than bronze and silver.
3. Any series that's in a mixed bag that has more than four games would be separated into its own PP that is run by the admin of the mixed bag unless they pass it on to someone else. While this may upset some of the admins, having certain PPs just really huge due to full series just sitting in there, kind of ruins the whole leaderboard thing and only leads to people losing interest in that PP. Like this one, huge PPs like Shonen Jump continue to grow every year.
4. A Rule where people would have to show interest in the PP they are in stay in the hall of fame or leaderboard. This would be by either continuing to rank up or by posting your thoughts on each game as you finish them or by simply checking in and saying hey I'm still interested in this I just been playing other games. I know that rule seem kind of mean or unnecessary because it would just be used to exclude people, but the fact is, if people don't really have interest in the series and are just looking to be to use PP as a checklist or whatever they're not really adding to the Group or Community of PP. Nothing would stop them from using the emblems they earned they just wouldn’t be in the hall of fame or leaderboard. How long is to long without saying anything would be up to the admin of the PP they joined and of course if they are plat rank they don’t really have to say much since they are done. IMO this goes too far, PPs are meant to encourage people to try out or complete series.
5. No stacks would be needed for normal plat rank, but could be used for super plat rank. I like this one.
6. I would get rid of the genre and company rule. Because PPs like the metroidvania are good PPs that people seem to enjoy and certain games really should just be with the other games from the company that made them like the Telltale games. That doesn't mean there should be stuff like a Blizzard PP or Activation TP, but certain games just fit better with the other games from their company or genre. Indifferent to the matter.

 

2 hours ago, LeetWolf2 said:

I'm just going to quickly list changes I think should be made in order to improve PP (not including the ones I agreed with above):

• Close all currently inactive PP threads. Anyone interested in picking up any of them will be allowed to do so. Isn't this already happening?
• Limit thread Admin/owners to 3 threads maximum. Meh, if admins can handle more PPs, just let them.
• Limit amount of games included in each thread to 10. Any PP ideas that go beyond that would be rejected immediately. So what about series that have more than 10 games or series that have new releases periodically, like Final Fantasy, Tales of, Assassin's Creed, and Call of Duty?
• Limit amount of Bonus Awards to 3 as to not overwhelm participants Why, bonus tiles don't count for points and are for collectors. I say just let admins create how many they want.
• Use the original version of the automated leaderboard for the time being, the decreased amount of PPs would help its load time IIRC the first version had all PPs on 1 tab, right? If so, sure why not.
• Rehaul the main General Info thread and its rules and PP layout. Also keep the top 5 up to date weekly. Why the overhaul? What would need to be overhauled? Also the top 5 didn't change much, which is why it was changed to once in a month.
• Introduce a vetting process for possible PP admin/owners. We don't want people to abandon the threads like they have been. IMO admins who have put time and effort into their PP threads should have a say in the matter.
• PP admins/owners will have to update their threads a minimum of once a week It's what I already do, so I'm ok with this.
• If ZoneHunter has no interest in being the main admin of PP, we all vote for a new person. Since @xZoneHunter created the whole PP idea, it's IMO up to him.
• The Hidden/Black award should require at least one torphy earned in a game. People can't sign up to a thread unless they have that as a minimum. Indifferent towards the Black award being awarded for having a trophy or for joining a PP.

 

[LeetWolf2]

@soultaker655
Why would we do this? Could you Explain the reasons why you think this would help.

I've already stated that PP is over saturated with inactive threads that haven't been updated in months, even since last year. Why keep threads with owners that are inactive if they will never receive any updates? We have too many PP's and that's one of the many reasons it died out. It simply got out of control.

 

Why I do understand the spirit of this idea, I see no reason to block some games from being in a PP just because there isn't enough space.

We can increase the number if you'd like. The idea isn't to block currently existing PPs from increasing their games but to prevent PP threads from being created that include 30+ games.

 

Bonus Awards don't really matter, they are just something a admin could add if they wanted to.

I understand that but if a thread has a crazy amount of bonus awards people can sign up without actually participating in anything and essentially being an inactive user. Limiting the amount of awards will decrease the likelihood of this happening.

 

Even back when PP was super active the top 5 never changed. 

That's a fallacy, it did change. I kept a close eye on the leaderboard and whenever there was someone new who climbed to the top 5 it wasn't updated. Maybe it should be extended to the top 10 so we do see more change.
 

Most of the admins are people who where some of the most active poster on psnp. What would this vetting process look like and how would it stop people from just leaving the site.
Honestly, I don't know what the process would be like it was just a suggestion. We do need some way of ensuring people don't abandon their threads. There are currently more inactive threads than active ones. I think that's a clear sign something needs to be done about it.

 

Why I do understand the spirit of this idea, after the PP storm stop most threads didn't get new post for months. Weekly updates only work if there are things to update.

Obviously if there's nothing to update then there will be no updates, that wasn't my point. Again, there are threads that haven't had their Halls of Fame updated in 6 months or even since last year. They need to be at least checked on once a week, and if everything is up to date then leave it as it is.

I'm pretty sure @xZoneHunter is the most upset in how PP has turned out, but really it comes down to the fact that everyone likes to talk about doing stuff to help PP, but they never actually do any of that stuff. IMO Zone should stay as main Admin and maybe you and I should be the secondary/helper admins.

Although I do want to be involved in the rebooting I don't know if I can dedicate the time to maintaining PP overall and having 3 threads to look after. Besides I'd only agree to that if people were happy for me to be in that sort of role. But if zonehunter is going to be inactive when it comes to this thread then there's no point trying to reboot PP in the first place.

 

Unless we want to turn this into a "Only play these 'cool' games" club I don't think we should limit the number of PP. 

It's not about saying "Okay, we're going to only have 50 PPs, lets pick which ones they'll be". It's about preventing it getting out of hand like it did, preventing every single PP idea under the sun from being approved. People like the idea of being an admin of their own PP thread but when it actually came down to it only 22 of those are up to date. Three of those are mine and some of those were ones taken over by new owners after they had been closed. I just don't want a situation like we have now. I want PP to last, I don't want us to be in this situation 6 months or even a year from now because it got out of control again.
 

As for the leaderboard I remember @bladesoframen was working on some super leaderboard. IRL stuff most likely got in the way, but maybe we should see what he has.
Yeah, would be cool to see if he finished it or is still working on it but I wouldn't hold out much hope for it as his last post about the leaderboard was months ago.

I also want to ask, is there even any point in keeping my threads up to date considering everything is up in the air at the moment?

[OmegaFenron]

4 hours ago, Dragon-Archon said:

Now it's up to the PP admin whether or not stacking is required for the plat rank. IIRC the Metal Gear PP requires stacking.

 

The genre/company rule means that all games from a series must be eligible and used when creating a PP. For example: Darksiders 1 meets the requirements for the Dragons PP, but Darksiders II didn't, so I couldn't just add the first game. In the end both of them weren't added.

 

 

Thanks for the explanation.

 

I think for a situation like that you should be able to add Darksiders 1 without having to add Darksiders 2 unless the game is already part of a series big enough to make it's own PP.

[Dragon-Archon]

1 hour ago, woop94 said:

 

Thanks for the explanation.

 

I think for a situation like that you should be able to add Darksiders 1 without having to add Darksiders 2 unless the game is already part of a series big enough to make it's own PP.

 

It doesn't matter now if the rules are changed, Darksiders is in the Angels & Demons PP  .

[OmegaFenron]

4 hours ago, Dragon-Archon said:

 

It doesn't matter now if the rules are changed, Darksiders is in the Angels & Demons PP  .

 

I knew I'd seen it in one. Was saying for other situations but just used yours as an example.

[Wavergray]

Let's do this for now.

Hello: @Xionx @Dragon-Archon @GarciaFever @jem12345 @Lucas @Shana Alter @SkyesUnholy @Whyfire @dell9300 @Kevvik @zadorvp @A-Brawl3r @Hemiak @HcG Clawz @Ichiban-Hybrid

 

Do you still wish to be the admin of the PP you run regardless of what changes may or may not happen to PP?

Edited August 17, 2017 by soultaker655

[GarciaFever]

@soultaker655 yes I do.

[jemmie]

I'll run the Shonen Jump PP the way I see fit. I haven't looked at this thread in a few weeks, and there seems to have been a lot of debating going on. Let me give it a close read before I say more.

[Wavergray]

Hello: @ExHaseo @TheLastSurvivorD @Satoshi Ookami @Boooda @Happy @Gibbo_0113 @Nozomi @colinmazzini

@Neku-tan @Zach @Doctor Doom @Leon Castle @YaoiGod @Tosmasta00 @zajac9999 @Blue Flare @sundrew @jantrick2 @Xeliot @JadedDragos 

 

Do you still wish to be the admin of the PP you run regardless of what changes may or may not happen to PP?

[Satoshi Ookami]

My PPs need to change.

[Wavergray]

5 minutes ago, Satoshi Ookami said:

My PPs need to change.

In what way?

[Dragon-Archon]

37 minutes ago, soultaker655 said:

Let's do this for now.

Hello: @Xionx @Dragon-Archon @GarciaFever @jem12345 @Lucas @Shana Alter @SkyesUnholy @Whyfire @dell9300 @Kevvik @zadorvp @A-Brawl3r @Hemiak @HcG Clawz @Ichiban-Hybrid

 

Do you still wish to be the admin of the PP you run regardless of what changes may or may not happen to PP?

Sure

 

8 minutes ago, Satoshi Ookami said:

My PPs need to change.

 

1 minute ago, soultaker655 said:

In what way?

Less niche and less Japanese  .

Edited August 17, 2017 by Dragon-Archon

[Fire]

39 minutes ago, soultaker655 said:

Let's do this for now.

Hello: @Xionx @Dragon-Archon @GarciaFever @jem12345 @Lucas @Shana Alter @SkyesUnholy @Whyfire @dell9300 @Kevvik @zadorvp @A-Brawl3r @Hemiak @HcG Clawz @Ichiban-Hybrid

 

Do you still wish to be the admin of the PP you run regardless of what changes may or may not happen to PP?

Yea, i do...

[ExHaseo]

42 minutes ago, soultaker655 said:

Let's do this for now.

Hello: @Xionx @Dragon-Archon @GarciaFever @jem12345 @Lucas @Shana Alter @SkyesUnholy @Whyfire @dell9300 @Kevvik @zadorvp @A-Brawl3r @Hemiak @HcG Clawz @Ichiban-Hybrid

 

Do you still wish to be the admin of the PP you run regardless of what changes may or may not happen to PP?

Yeah, I'll keep being admin for my PP. 

[jemmie]

Okay, I read everything, and here are some main points based on what I've seen.

1. The ranking system shouldn't be changed. Not only will it annoy the people who care about the leaderboard (yes, scores will change), but everyone will need to change the layout of their PPs, complete with entirely new emblems and moving a bunch of names around. Besides, the gradual climb towards higher ranks is more fun and a lot less daunting than having to jump straight to half of the plats (especially if a PP has a lot of games).
2. Having a PP with four, or even three games should be allowed. Just don't give them plat ranks. Treat them like 100% "checkmark" series, similar to games that barely have any trophies and no plat. That way, people can't spam plat ranks. Make the told rank gold for four games and silver if anyone feels the need to go lower than that.
3. Inactive threads shouldn't be closed. They should be "delisted". If an admin goes too long without updating their PP, zone or somebody else should post "DELISTED" on their thread, and then points for that PP won't be included in the General Leaderboard until someone revives the PP, whether that's the admin or a helpful supporter.
4. @xZoneHunter shouldn't be replaced. He should be helped! Why are we expecting one guy to manage dozens of PPs? We need a team, a PP Squadron if you will. If we just have about five people taking turns updating this thread, the game list, and the leaderboard, it would actually be manageable.
5. Hidden (Black) Trophies are kind of dumb without AT LEAST earning a single trophy in a game. I don't really like them in general, but if other PP owners wish to keep them around, at least do that.
6. Bonus emblems are ridiculous IF the PP is small. If, however, your PP is like mine and includes multiple series, it only makes sense to cater to those who only wish to plat part of the PP. I have heard many people express their opinions on how, for example, they want to plat all of DBZ and Naruto, but maybe not Saint Seiya of FOTNS. That's okay! With there being bonus emblems, participants still have something to earn at the end of their journey. It's all about perspective.
7. Updating weekly is a little ridiculous, but admins should at least try to think of ways to better their PP. I now have my semiannual banner challenge, and it would be nice to see people post updates on their games as they play them. I don't at the moment because PP seemed to be dead for the most part.
8. There should be little constraint in terms of what qualifies for a PP. Of course, we're not going to see a PP with Mayo and Dead Nation in it (now wouldn't that be something?), but if someone feels that they have a group of unused games that go together, why not have him/her create another PP? The number of PPs doesn't matter. It's the quality of the PPs. If a new PP is greatly cared for, it'll be a great addition to the community. If not, "delist" it.

I probably missed some things, but those are the main points.

[xZoneHunter]

I'm also a fan of keeping the old rankings. Since the idea behind them was rewarding people for getting a platinum rank in a PP. You don't want a few bronze ranks being the same value as one platinum rank.

[Tosmasta00]

@soultaker655

 

Yeah i still wanna since it's the first time i'm an admin of anything.

 

Also what about PP's that don't have much traffic like mine will they get delisted aswell?

Edited August 17, 2017 by Tosmasta00

[Wavergray]

Just now, xZoneHunter said:

I'm also a fan of keeping the old rankings. Since the idea behind them was rewarding people for getting a platinum rank in a PP. You don't want a few bronze ranks being the same value as one platinum rank.

The admin has spoken. Ranks stay the same.