Trophy Rarity Question

[DrBloodmoney]

Um,,, the very first post of this topic was not about how many ultra trophies members have. It may have been the focus in past topics but was not planning on being for this one. This was raised as the current method is raising the average rarity of a whole profile way more than what it should be.

While I like having rare trophies to some degree I could care less if I have 100 ultra rare or 1000 I play a game because I enjoy it not becasue it could be classed as a hard or rare trophy game

HOW DARE YOU TRY TO MAKE SENSE ON A TROPHY RARITY THREAD!

RAR RAR RARRRRR LOUD NOISES!

[fisty123]

HOW DARE YOU TRY TO MAKE SENSE ON A TROPHY RARITY THREAD!

RAR RAR RARRRRR LOUD NOISES!

I thought I would get away with this one  

I have been through the stage of smashing on VN's for trophies and in the end It was doing damage to my enjoyment of gaming. So I am sticking to games I enjoy more than meh I might give it a go or I need to boost my trophies up, my main issue was the DLC being displayed as 100% for the first few trophies of the list even if that DLC is rather hard to get

[DrBloodmoney]

I thought I would get away with this one  

I have been through the stage of smashing on VN's for trophies and in the end It was doing damage to my enjoyment of gaming. So I am sticking to games I enjoy more than meh I might give it a go or I need to boost my trophies up, my main issue was the DLC being displayed as 100% for the first few trophies of the list even if that DLC is rather hard to get

Hey, im with you - im one of the poor saps who spent countless hours plugging away at getting The Last of Us Grounded mode and the Metro Last Light Ranger Mode, and the Batman Arkham City Nightwing and Robin DLC, just to get my 100% in those games, only for those trophies to actually make my 'average rarity' stat look worse!

Cant help my OCD nature I guess!

[FawltyPowers]

Hey, im with you - im one of the poor saps who spent countless hours plugging away at getting The Last of Us Grounded mode and the Metro Last Light Ranger Mode, and the Batman Arkham City Nightwing and Robin DLC, just to get my 100% in those games, only for those trophies to actually make my 'average rarity' stat look worse!

Cant help my OCD nature I guess!

 

Haha I'm doing Arkham City now after a break of over a year playing it. Just finished Catwoman were the campaigns were an Ultra Rare of 2.50%. Last year I remember thinking if I can get those out of the way Robin and Nightwing will be a breeze as they are Common trophies, back then I didn't really look at what the stats meant. Wow these final few trophies are tedious, it's completely took away what was originally a really enjoyable game. Would be nice to have at least a rare from them for my troubles

[Auto-Tomato]

Unfortunately, that's exactly the opposite of what I'm saying.

See, I did read your posts. I just don't agree with them

Er, I replied to this at the time...where did the post go?

 

Anyway, my bad if I misread you...guess that makes us even!  

[MMDE]

Hey, im with you - im one of the poor saps who spent countless hours plugging away at getting The Last of Us Grounded mode and the Metro Last Light Ranger Mode, and the Batman Arkham City Nightwing and Robin DLC, just to get my 100% in those games, only for those trophies to actually make my 'average rarity' stat look worse!

Cant help my OCD nature I guess!

 

Average rarity is absolutely pointless anyways. You'd have games like Dark Souls at 17.5% plat rarity and then there's the easiest plat I've done to date, which is Get Fit With Mel B at 13%... 

 

Simply put, ignore it, it's meaningless.

Edited November 25, 2015 by MMDE

[DrBloodmoney]

Average rarity is absolutely pointless anyways. You'd have games like Dark Souls at 17.5% plat rarity and then there's the easiest plat I've done to date, which is Get Fit With Mel B at 13%... [\quote]

Yes - sorry, i posted a response to this the reread yourostand realised i totally missed the detail of what you were saying...

You are right!

Edited November 25, 2015 by DrBloodmoney

[Gibbo_0113]

Average rarity is absolutely pointless anyways. You'd have games like Dark Souls at 17.5% plat rarity and then there's the easiest plat I've done to date, which is Get Fit With Mel B at 13%... 

 

Simply put, ignore it, it's meaningless.

Yeah, most people didnt even realise the average rarity until it was put on the main profile page anyway. Might be best to just leave that on the stat page 

[FawltyPowers]

Average Rarity is meaningless, whereas an average of your rarest trophy achieved for each game..........

[DrBloodmoney]

Average Rarity is meaningless, whereas an average of your rarest trophy achieved for each game..........

A much more meaningful stat would be 'Average Platinum Rarity'

[MMDE]

A much more meaningful stat would be 'Average Platinum Rarity'

 

As I just showed earlier, it would still be completely pointless. Because then a game like Get Fit with Mel B gets you a lower average than Dark Souls.

 

Just count you ultra rares, that's a better indication IMO and it avoids all the downfalls of the average.

Edited November 25, 2015 by MMDE

[FawltyPowers]

As I just showed earlier, it would still be completely pointless. Because then a game like Get Fit with Mel B gets you a lower average than Dark Souls.

 

Just count you ultra rares, that's a better indication IMO and it avoids all the downfalls of the average.

 

I've never played Get Fit with Mel B but from what I've read there's an EU and NA version that share the same trophy list. The EU version is a piece of cake whereas the NA version is a lot more tricky. That could account for it or it could be a lot of people brought the game specifically for it's intended purpose of working out and gave up part way through due to it being too tough, just like people do when they join a real gym.

 

You can never be literal with trophy rarity due to far too many factors, only use it as a guide. I don't think anyone finds the Average Rarity stat useful, instead it confuses people into believing it's something that it isn't.

[MMDE]

I've never played Get Fit with Mel B but from what I've read there's an EU and NA version that share the same trophy list. The EU version is a piece of cake whereas the NA version is a lot more tricky. That could account for it or it could be a lot of people brought the game specifically for it's intended purpose of working out and gave up part way through due to it being too tough, just like people do when they join a real gym.

 

You can never be literal with trophy rarity due to far too many factors, only use it as a guide. I don't think anyone finds the Average Rarity stat useful, instead it confuses people into believing it's something that it isn't.

 

I bet you just read that from the guide. Did you take a look at who wrote the guide? =P Anyways, I think it has more to do with being extremely boring.

 

Anyways, there's plenty of other examples to go around. Unless there are some seriously hard or long trophies, it is usually more of an indicator of how many who has got the game and if is any good or people like it etc. If for example a game is given out through PS+, the % is going down, because many will just try it and that's it. Likewise, if the game is terrible, many may just don't want to finish it. It's not a good indicator. I've got three games 100% where almost every trophy is ultra rare (a couple even having a platinum...)... And honestly, they weren't THAT hard.

[FawltyPowers]

I bet you just read that from the guide. Did you take a look at who wrote the guide? =P Anyways, I think it has more to do with being extremely boring.

 

Anyways, there's plenty of other examples to go around. Unless there are some seriously hard or long trophies, it is usually more of an indicator of how many who has got the game and if is any good or people like it etc. If for example a game is given out through PS+, the % is going down, because many will just try it and that's it. Likewise, if the game is terrible, many may just don't want to finish it. It's not a good indicator. I've got three games 100% where almost every trophy is ultra rare (a couple even having a platinum...)... And honestly, they weren't THAT hard.

 

Completely agree, there are so many factors that determine rarity, the main ones being difficulty, grind, luck, online and PS+ (PS+ arguably giving the biggest rarity discrepancies for the reasons you wrote)

 

Yes you're right I did read it from the guide, I was interested to know why a game with a diffuculty of 1/10 only had a 13% Platinum Rarity score, didn't know you'd wrote it though, nice one

[Bean-Dip_Man7]

Could we just put in like a checkbox for whether you own the DLC or not? For example, I've technically started the Bloodborne DLC but have not yet gotten any trophies. So I could check YES, that I have the DLC, even though I don't have the first trophy. That'll bump down the otherwise permanent 100% trophy rarity on Defeat Ludwig to something more realistic. I feel like this would appease the people whining that they don't want to play DLC, as well as the people who want a not-idiotic trophy rarity system. Would everyone check the box? Hell no! But it would help and it would stop the constant questioning at least...

[MMDE]

Yes you're right I did read it from the guide, I was interested to know why a game with a diffuculty of 1/10 only had a 13% Platinum Rarity score, didn't know you'd wrote it though, nice one

 

I said the EU version is 1/10, because all you do is press up and cross, and navigate some menus once in a while. That's it. The catch is that it takes like 18-20 hours or something, and that the NA version is a lot more requiring and harder. Yes, this contribute to the lower rarity, but that doesn't change the fact that the game can be a 1/10 difficulty and it still is at 13%.

 

I actually sold that game for more than I bought it for. I remember when I could do that. I bought 4 or 5 copies of the same game and sold it as "used" with profit in various video game stores near me. haha

[NotAFoxAnymore]

Average rarity is absolutely pointless anyways. You'd have games like Dark Souls at 17.5% plat rarity and then there's the easiest plat I've done to date, which is Get Fit With Mel B at 13%... 

 

Simply put, ignore it, it's meaningless.

 

But did you actually get fit with Mel B?

Edited November 26, 2015 by Makise Kurisu

[MMDE]

But did you actually get fit with Mel B?

 

No, got fat with Mel B, but I heard for someone else, it was a pretty decent exercise, and it has diets etc too.

Edited November 26, 2015 by MMDE

[fisty123]

Average rarity is absolutely pointless anyways. You'd have games like Dark Souls at 17.5% plat rarity and then there's the easiest plat I've done to date, which is Get Fit With Mel B at 13%... 

 

Simply put, ignore it, it's meaningless.

It might be a pointless stat to you however the stat is still made available and there are members who watch that stat,

Rare trophies are not always going to be hard trophies, many people may have brought Get Fit With Mel B and just not liked it and stopped playing it not everyone on here is a die-hard plat hunter.

I play a lot of unpopular games in the eyes of most gamers and the games I play a lot of people chuck in halfway giving it a rare plat, is the game hard not really sometimes long but not hard.

 

The DLC section can be treated the same way, not all members on here are die hard 100% hunters and do not care for added DLC, should the trophy ranks of that DLC be treated different to the 100% complete I don't think so and at this stage it is. Which is why we were discussing another method to keep both parties involved happy

[MMDE]

It might be a pointless stat to you however the stat is still made available and there are members who watch that stat,

Rare trophies are not always going to be hard trophies, many people may have brought Get Fit With Mel B and just not liked it and stopped playing it not everyone on here is a die-hard plat hunter.

I play a lot of unpopular games in the eyes of most gamers and the games I play a lot of people chuck in halfway giving it a rare plat, is the game hard not really sometimes long but not hard.

 

The DLC section can be treated the same way, not all members on here are die hard 100% hunters and do not care for added DLC, should the trophy ranks of that DLC be treated different to the 100% complete I don't think so and at this stage it is. Which is why we were discussing another method to keep both parties involved happy

 

It's not just that it's a meaningless stat to me, but overall, it makes no sense and it has very little positive effect on the community. If someone watch it, I don't get it, because it's rather misleading and therefore pretty much pointless.

 

EDIT:

Just to be clear, I gave the reasons for why it's misleading in my last post, so unless you're going to refute that with an actual argument or something, it's very little point in telling me that some people do watch it. I'm saying they're being mislead, else they'd know how pointless it is. Show me that I'm wrong about this, and I will grant you that there's some usefulness to it and it's not misleading.

Edited November 30, 2015 by MMDE

[Tosmasta00]

I liked how it was before it got changed into has 1 trophy in it to count as dlc owner. Because i had like 100 more Ultra Rare trophies lol.

[MMDE]

I liked how it was before it got changed into has 1 trophy in it to count as dlc owner. Because i had like 100 more Ultra Rare trophies lol.

 

This is one of the main reasons it was changed. It made a somewhat useful label rather useless. The other would be that we were making up numbers that definitely wasn't real.

 

EDIT:

I see you got Spelunker HD 100%, yeah, that one game alone would be another 27 ultra rares.

Edited November 30, 2015 by MMDE

[fisty123]

It's not just that it's a meaningless stat to me, but overall, it makes no sense and it has very little positive effect on the community. If someone watch it, I don't get it, because it's rather misleading and therefore pretty much pointless.

 

EDIT:

Just to be clear, I gave the reasons for why it's misleading in my last post, so unless you're going to refute that with an actual argument or something, it's very little point in telling me that some people do watch it. I'm saying they're being mislead, else they'd know how pointless it is. Show me that I'm wrong about this, and I will grant you that there's some usefulness to it and it's not misleading.

Really your going to talk about an actual argument but so far all you keep offering is how YOU want the site to be and not provide any details on how to come to a peaceful resolution or accept anyone's ideas I am yet to see you provide an actual argument that is enough to go yep we don't need this.

 

Let's put gamer A ) who plays long games with take will take a lot of time to finish, these trophies will start off as common but the end trophies are rare which which give the gamer a ruff figure of 35% avg

Let's put gamer B ) someone who only skips visual novels to get lots of trophies and only plays a few games longer that 15 hours which we will say gives them an 75% avg

Let's put gamer C ) who plays standard games or mainstream games which we will give them a ruff figure of 50%

I could keep going here but that ratio can explain what type of gamer they are without having to scroll through their who trophy profile,

 

Also for me it is more of a personal goal I want to have that stat below 50% what is so wrong about that, just becasue you don't like does not mean everyone else is the same, if this was the case it would have been removed a while ago.

 

This is one of the main reasons it was changed. It made a somewhat useful label rather useless. The other would be that we were making up numbers that definitely wasn't real.

 

EDIT:

I see you got Spelunker HD 100%, yeah, that one game alone would be another 27 ultra rares.

But we are still making up numbers now so how is this current way correct either?

 

At the end of the day this is also a forum and forums allow us to talk about our opinions, you have yours and I have mine 

Edited November 30, 2015 by fisty123

[MMDE]

Really your going to talk about an actual argument but so far all you keep offering is how YOU want the site to be and not provide any details on how to come to a peaceful resolution or accept anyone's ideas I am yet to see you provide an actual argument that is enough to go yep we don't need this.

 

Let's put gamer A ) who plays long games with take will take a lot of time to finish, these trophies will start off as common but the end trophies are rare which which give the gamer a ruff figure of 35% avg

Let's put gamer B ) someone who only skips visual novels to get lots of trophies and only plays a few games longer that 15 hours which we will say gives them an 75% avg

Let's put gamer C ) who plays standard games or mainstream games which we will give them a ruff figure of 50%

I could keep going here but that ratio can explain what type of gamer they are without having to scroll through their who trophy profile,

 

Also for me it is more of a personal goal I want to have that stat below 50% what is so wrong about that, just becasue you don't like does not mean everyone else is the same, if this was the case it would have been removed a while ago.

 

Here's the thing, how long or how hard the games you play is usually not represented by the average rarity. It simply isn't. Even if you only do so. Why? Because this isn't often the biggest factor and it usually only affect some few trophies in a game. What really makes a huge difference is how popular or good the game is, if it has been free for PS+ etc etc. There's generally a lower rarity on the rarest trophies in a game with a long and hard plat, but this is far from necessarily the case, and again, it's just some few trophies while the rest may not be rare at all.

 

I already told you this, and you didn't make any argument in the post I responded to that I could see, at least other than saying some people still look at it or something.

 

Anyways, I've a lot of easy games on my profile, yet my average rarity is below 50%. In fact, mine is 10% lower than yours, and I have in no way ever cared about it or even tried and have played lots of easy games. You on the other hand got a lot of long JRPG plats. In other words, you can clearly see how this is a pretty useless stat. I have however played a lot of shitty games and obscure games.

 

I've come with suggestions, and that is to look at things like specific trophies, or ultra rares the way they currently are. If a game has several hard trophies, this wouldn't be well represented if we went for average plat rarity either.

 

If you want to affect your average rarity, I'd recommend you go for shitty games people stop playing after a short amount of time and doesn't get most of the trophies for. Go look at your at your JRPGs, people who play them know what they're getting into and actually plat them. They may be long and tiresome, but their average rarity is terrible in comparison to time and effort invested to obtain them. The stat in no way represent what you want.

 

But we are still making up numbers now so how is this current way correct either?

 

At the end of the day this is also a forum and forums allow us to talk about our opinions, you have yours and I have mine 

 

 

DLC rarity calculation is another topic than this thread, but no, you only count confirmed numbers, so they're not made up.

 

But there is a related topic to it, which is that they affect the average rarity, which I totally get is annoying. :\

 

Yeah, people can talk about their opinions on a forum...

Edited November 30, 2015 by MMDE

[starcrunch061]

Average rarity helper? Try Pier Solar. Only two trophies in that game have any difficulty whatsoever.

 

Answering a couple of earlier posts here:

1. Agree with others - I don't see the point of average rarity. Mine is below 45% - I wonder in what fisty category I fall? 
2. Having recently bought a PS4, please do NOT use their system for rarity computations. PSNP's is so much better.