Rarity Leaderboard

[scemopagliaccioh]

8 hours ago, DrBloodmoney said:

Oh, I’m well aware of that phenomenon- as my rare trophies in Space Overlords can attest - that game might have been a free Ps+ game, but man, was it an unholy abortion of a game!

 

On the other hand though, I guess it can also benefit good games - Invisible Inc isn’t all that difficult, and it’s one of the best games I’ve ever played, but it’s rarity was pushed artificially through the roof by being a PS+ game  

Wait a second.

You're the author for Space Overlords' trophy guide!

Omfg, you baited me  with the time and plat difficulty  into playing that shitty game ;_;

[DrBloodmoney]

18 minutes ago, Angus1343 said:

I like the look of this and really hope it gets implemented. However, I do see where @DrBloodmoney is coming from. Both this and the current leaderboard would be pretty easily exploited in short time, either by playing tons of ratalaika shovelware, or focusing on easy quick ultra rare games( boosting ancient ps3 games, garbage that was given free on plus etc.) Heck one could even climb both very rapidly if they could tolerate playing these type of games a lot.

However the average trophy hunter would be left in the dust on both leaderboards if just playing typical games regardless of the amount of effort given or the rate of which they are completing them. It would be nice if there were some way to measure this effort as well somehow. 

This rarity leaderboard would be a great addition to the site, but it isn't the solution to the ezpz problem that many are looking for.

Quite right - nothing wrong with more stuff on the site, but I don’t think this will ‘solve’ all (if any) of the complaints of many site users.

 

On the plus side though - Hey! We get to look forward to the inevitable new pejorative terminology that will rise in the shadow of this new Board... 

 

Not by everyone of course - plenty of people are perfectly nice, but it’s funny how quickly those pejoratives appear, become common, then become so much a part of the site lexicon that no one bats an eyelid.

 

in addition to the current crop of usual suspects:

‘Shovelware’

‘Rata Trash’

‘EZPZ’

‘Stackers’

and that old, mean-spirited chestnut: ‘Trophy Whore’ 

 

a new strain of dismissive and cruel terms will most likely rise, to describe:

 

Easy but rare games

Games only rare because they are bad,

Games that are only rare because of PS+,

Games that are rare only because of a massive boosting requirement

People who own 4 consoles to self boost

People who stack UR games across regions

People who avoid non-rare games

....

as well as, I’m certain, some terribly witty but actually pretty cutting and nasty term to describe the casual ‘chumps’ who play PS+ games and fail to finish, making them more rare.

 

Probably also an even more condescending one to describe the casual ‘chumps’ who do manage to get some trophies, netting a few rare trophies, and ‘messing up’ the rarities even though “they have no place on our board and should stick to their casual Triple A’s”

Hope I’m wrong, of course.

But, y’know.

I doubt it.  ? 

 

 

[Angus1343]

10 minutes ago, MMDE said:

 

If everyone keeps boosting those easy ones, they will just turn common. Some few games aren't an issue IMO, as long as they aren't awarded an insane amount.

Yeah I'm aware. In terms of calculating rarity I think you've come up with a pretty spot on representation. The people who deserve to be high up are right there where I think they should be, and see no problems with this being implemented whatsoever.

[DrBloodmoney]

12 minutes ago, scemopagliaccioh said:

Wait a second.

You're the author for Space Overlords' trophy guide!

Omfg, you baited me  with the time and plat difficulty  into playing that shitty game ;_;

? was I hell!

 

That was @MMDE

 

Don’t you try and pin that on me - I’m a victim, same as you!

[steel6burgh]

3 hours ago, KennethMcCormick said:

 

 

First of all, thank you for trying to get this LB under way @MMDE, by actually doing something about it.

 

I see another issue, though, that most people won't care about in the main, points based LB (except if they're bothered by stacks, maybe), but that could be quite unfair in a rarity focused one: the regional differences. NA has a hell of an advantage, as far as rarity is concerned.

 

For example, I just took a few games I played. For ease of reading, I only took their PS4 versions, and the 100% score for games with DLC. Highlighted some extremes in bold.

 

                                                                                            EU              NA             JP           AS
 
Contrast                                                                           18.61           14.56          21.13          -
Divinity: Original Sin 2                                                       4.69            2.44            9.68           -
Hellblade: Senua's Sacrifice                                            41.07           34.52            -                -
Injustice: Gods Among Us Ultimate Edition                       0.16            0.14             -                -
Onechanbara Z2: Chaos                                                 11.28            6.92           9.80            -
Phantom Doctrine                                                             5.28            1.28              -                -
Secret Ponchos                                                                 0.15            0.11             -                -
Sleeping Dogs: Definitive Edition                                    12.52            8.99             -            20.65
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt - GOTY Edition                         7.29            4.40             -                 -

 

 

So, according to MMDE's table, rounding at the nearest number, the NA plat for Phantom Doctrine would be worth 1796 pts, whereas its EU counterpart would only score 306. So a x4.1 difference would lead to a x5.9 LB points difference for the exact same game with the exact same difficulty. Sleeping Dogs would get 26 pts with the AS version, 127 with the US one.

 

No system is perfect, but I was wondering how the different versions were tagged in the website database, namely if it would be possible, for example, to take the average of all the versions for the only purpose of computing the rarity of any given trophy in those lists. If they're tagged manually, it might be nigh impossible... And it shouldn't be too much of a kick in the nuts for UR stackers if you still kept each version independently (someone who stacks Injustice:GAU would have two 0.15 instead of one 0.14 and one 0.16).

 

 

Why does this leaderboard have to be perfect in every way?  Is the current quantity over quality leaderboard this perfect???  Rewarding the same, maybe even a lesser, gamer score for a 100 hour platinum with difficulty as a 5 minute platinum such as 1000 top rated with no level of difficulty at all.  It doesn't have to be perfection my friend.  Anything is better than what we got.  

[scemopagliaccioh]

10 minutes ago, DrBloodmoney said:

was I hell!

 

That was @MMDE

 

Don’t you try and pin that on me - I’m a victim, same as you!

Woops, apologies, I misquoted the message,  tends to happen on the phone, yeah, it was a very bad game, glad I got it out of the way.

[pot1414]

1 hour ago, MMDE said:

 

Yeah, and I think that's an argument for count the UR. I see it less of a good case when there's one difficult trophy and it just pops alongside that final last one everyone struggles with. When it's rarer than all the other ones, it means there's like this extra total effort to get it. Ultimately, there's only one per trophy list, so I don't think it's a huge issue.

I think most people would agree that platinums should be counted.I have seen plenty of games where the platinum is quite a bit more rare than the rarest non-platinum trophy because of the overall effort required.Also since it contributes to the ultra rare count it makes sense to include it.

[Kal2210]

A few thoughts after reading through this:

 

1.) MMDE put a decent amount of work in and most seem to agree it’s a solid formula.

2.) This leaderboard will NOT be perfect. It’s not supposed to be, nor can it ever be. It would still, however, be an awesome addition to the site.

3.) Some people are acting like all of those advocating for this rarity leaderboard would want the top positions (i.e. Hakoom) to change drastically. I don’t actually think that’s the case. I think this LB could actually be really cool for the mid tier players. There’s a big difference between world rank 30k and world rank 15k to some trophy hunters.

4.) It’d be strange to not count platinums IMO.

5.) With the addition of a rarity LB, is there any talk of updating profiles similar to how they were before? This would help obtain more accurate rankings, particularly between console generations.

Edited March 27, 2021 by Kal2210

[AuburnDRM]

47 minutes ago, Kal2210 said:

A few thoughts after reading through this:

 

1.) MMDE put a decent amount of work in and most seem to agree it’s a solid formula.

2.) This leaderboard will NOT be perfect. It’s not supposed to be, nor can it ever be. It would still, however, be an awesome addition to the site.

3.) Some people are acting like all of those advocating for this rarity leaderboard would want the top positions (i.e. Hakoom) to change drastically. I don’t actually think that’s the case. I think this LB could actually be really cool for the mid tier players. There’s a big difference between world rank 30k and world rank 15k to some trophy hunters.

4.) It’d be strange to not count platinums IMO.

5.) With the addition of a rarity LB, is there any talk of updating profiles similar to how they were before? This would help obtain more accurate rankings, particularly between console generations.

I agree with these points.

 

It's also worth noting on #3 that chasing high point games and total completion count isn't always mutually exclusive in achievement hunting hobbies. It makes sense that someone who plays more rare games could match or surpass someone who focuses moreso on the quick to obtain trophies on a ranking that favors rarity. I'd imagine that a lot of Hakoom's rarity points would come from his PS3 days where the option of playing spam wasn't really there. This hobby is vastly different between hunters and it's nice to be able to rank different styles. Personally, the leaderboard here doesn't appeal to me at all and I use sites like Exophase since that assigns different values based on rarity. (And, of course, that's not perfect either)

 

Counting platinums is fine since it's weighted the same as any other trophy and not it's normal increased value. I'm sure there are a good number of plats out there where most of the game is relatively common with only the plat and a handful of others being all that rare. Including the plat would incentivize taking on these generally larger games and should still be in the realm of balance to non-plat rare games.

[Bumperklever]

On 3/27/2021 at 3:05 AM, DrBloodmoney said:

Quite right - nothing wrong with more stuff on the site, but I don’t think this will ‘solve’ all (if any) of the complaints of many site users.

 

The biggest complaints that I've seen on this side is that a lot of idea's and requests isn't implemented and that there is no feedback.

Likewise is the rarity leaderboard is one of the, if not the biggest one people have been requesting.

 

Quote

On the plus side though - Hey! We get to look forward to the inevitable new pejorative terminology that will rise in the shadow of this new Board... 

 

Not by everyone of course - plenty of people are perfectly nice, but it’s funny how quickly those pejoratives appear, become common, then become so much a part of the site lexicon that no one bats an eyelid.

 

in addition to the current crop of usual suspects:

‘Shovelware’

‘Rata Trash’

‘EZPZ’

‘Stackers’

and that old, mean-spirited chestnut: ‘Trophy Whore’ 

 

 

 

The reason of these terms came along were because of the spammy nature of these games. There also easy to create and easy to make multiple stacks from which opens the floodgates for easy uneven leaderboard progression. These people can easily be spotted by there tremendous amount of easy platinum stacks.

 

Quote

a new strain of dismissive and cruel terms will most likely rise, to describe:

 

Easy but rare games

Games only rare because they are bad,

Games that are only rare because of PS+,

Games that are rare only because of a massive boosting requirement

People who own 4 consoles to self boost

People who stack UR games across regions

People who avoid non-rare games

....

as well as, I’m certain, some terribly witty but actually pretty cutting and nasty term to describe the casual ‘chumps’ who play PS+ games and fail to finish, making them more rare.

 

Probably also an even more condescending one to describe the casual ‘chumps’ who do manage to get some trophies, netting a few rare trophies, and ‘messing up’ the rarities even though “they have no place on our board and should stick to their casual Triple A’s”

 

There are no slurs for the above quoted, atleast not that I know of and neither do you I assume. So I wonder if these terms could become slurs with the implementation of a rarity leaderboard.

 

1. Other sites already have a rarity leaderboard;

2. It is kinda hard to point out profiles or games in this trend.

 

The only slur that is used and can be easily spotted is "elitist" people that only play UR games.

 

---------------------------------

 

The leaderboard has always been a quantitative game, with easy games given you spots higher then harder games. But I would like to see a quality (rarity) system next to it. Especially in a beautifully designed site as PSNProfiles.

 

[Arcesius]

On 27.3.2021 at 3:05 AM, DrBloodmoney said:

a new strain of dismissive and cruel terms will most likely rise, to describe:

 

Easy but rare games

Games only rare because they are bad,

Games that are only rare because of PS+,

Games that are rare only because of a massive boosting requirement

People who own 4 consoles to self boost

People who stack UR games across regions

People who avoid non-rare games

 

Thing is, UR hunters are well aware of the fact that there are quite a few games out there that are perfect for "UR whoring", and will use that term themselves. Let's be honest, nobody is putting rarity and challenge on an equal level, though there are many challenging games that deserve their low rarity. 

 

However, and this is what I like most about this new Leaderboard... as more and more people go for "UR whoring"-games, their rarity will unavoidably increase. In a "perfect" rarity-based Leaderboard, those types of games will grant less and less points over time, with the more challenging games being in the end the ones that grant the most points as their rarity either stagnates or keeps falling as more people attempt to go for them. That's never going to be the case entirely, but at least in the rarity leaderboard people will lose and win points as the games change in rarity, while the traditional LB simply assigns points to trophy types (why is a Gold necessarily worth more than a Bronze?) and your overall number of points will never drop. 

 

My vision is that the rarity leaderboard will eventually introduce some sort of "competition" in the sense that going for games that push your rank further actually means challenging yourself, instead of stacking games left and right to amass as many points as possible. Nothing wrong with the latter, but I don't see any harm in having both worlds exist in parallel. 

 

 

Edited March 28, 2021 by Arcesius

[steel6burgh]

any news on this rarity leaderboard idea?

[AJ_Radio]

Just reading through this entire thread has given me a massive migraine.

 

I appreciate the enthusiasm and effort that people like MMDE have put into this, but I just have to wonder the kinds of priorities people have when it comes to trophies. You got the ever prevalent term 'trophy whores' and on the other side, the people who specifically hunt down ultra rares.

 

Having a good balance of both easy and hard games you enjoy is best. Should this rarity leaderboard come into fruition then there will be those who will go for ultra rares and 'prestige' trophies to chase the rankings. Which is more impressive than stacking 'EZPZ' trophies, but what is the point?

[Kal2210]

2 hours ago, AJ_Radio said:

Just reading through this entire thread has given me a massive migraine.

 

I appreciate the enthusiasm and effort that people like MMDE have put into this, but I just have to wonder the kinds of priorities people have when it comes to trophies. You got the ever prevalent term 'trophy whores' and on the other side, the people who specifically hunt down ultra rares.

 

Having a good balance of both easy and hard games you enjoy is best. Should this rarity leaderboard come into fruition then there will be those who will go for ultra rares and 'prestige' trophies to chase the rankings. Which is more impressive than stacking 'EZPZ' trophies, but what is the point?

I don’t understand your comment at all tbh. This is just another option to track for those with different interests. 

[steel6burgh]

33 minutes ago, Kal2210 said:

I don’t understand your comment at all tbh. This is just another option to track for those with different interests. 

yeah whats the point in the current leaderboard?  the mentality of the people at the top of this leaderboard I compare to the mentality of a hoarder.  They collect tons of things all day and when it's over they don't have anything worth a shit.  Anyway doesn't seem like any of it is going to happen anyway with a rarity leaderboard.  

[TomataEighty9]

Ultra Rare= 500. (26) 13.000

Very Rare=100 (56) 5.600

Rare=50 (108) 5,400

Uncommon=25 (245) 6,125

Common=10 (193) 1930

 

 

Mine = 32,055 points

 

 

 

 

[Joe Dubz]

8 hours ago, steel6burgh said:

yeah whats the point in the current leaderboard?  the mentality of the people at the top of this leaderboard I compare to the mentality of a hoarder.  They collect tons of things all day and when it's over they don't have anything worth a shit.  Anyway doesn't seem like any of it is going to happen anyway with a rarity leaderboard.  

This is probably one of the most accurate ways I have ever heard this said! You can collect as much junk as you want, but at the end of the day, all you have is one giant pile of junk ?

[DrBloodmoney]

9 hours ago, steel6burgh said:

yeah whats the point in the current leaderboard?  the mentality of the people at the top of this leaderboard I compare to the mentality of a hoarder.  They collect tons of things all day and when it's over they don't have anything worth a shit.  Anyway doesn't seem like any of it is going to happen anyway with a rarity leaderboard.  

 

6 minutes ago, Joe Dubz said:

This is probably one of the most accurate ways I have ever heard this said! You can collect as much junk as you want, but at the end of the day, all you have is one giant pile of junk 

 

The primary issue with the current leaderboard, as I understand it, is one of nomenclature.

Because the general term used for people who try for platinum in their games is 'Trophy Hunter', PSNP is considered a 'Trophy Hunter's' website.

Therefore, because the leaderboard is featured on said website, there is a general misunderstanding that it is a 'Trophy Hunter's Leaderboard'... but that isn't necessarily true. It never has been.

 

The term 'Trophy Hunting' is applicable to some aspect of what we do, and some of what is tracked on the leaderboard, but not all of it.

 

The platinums for, some games are 'trophies', and achieving them does requires something of a 'hunt', however, there are plenty of games for which the platinum is more of a 'receipt' - a proof of purchase -, than a 'trophy' by any real definition, and achieving them is no more a 'hunt' than finding ones credit card is. 

 

There is nothing wrong with those games - either creating, purchasing or playing them - but the problem comes when we try to consider everything a 'trophy' and everything a 'hunt', just because we self-identify with the term 'Trophy Hunter'.

The difference between getting a Housemarque platinum for example, vs. getting Breakthrough Gaming Arcade platinum is the difference between stalking a deer with a bow and arrow, shooting skinning, and cooking it on a spit roast over a campfire, vs. going to McDonalds for a Big Mac.

 

The Leaderboard is not, and never has been, about how you got the meal - it is purely about how many calories you ate.

 

Realistically, there is no distinction between 'Trophy Hunters' and 'Receipt Collectors', and that can drive some self-identified 'Trophy Hunters' batty...

 

...but if this thread, and the myriad of threads that came before it have proven anything, it's that it will be difficult, if not impossible, to find an appropriate dividing line between the two.

 

Especially when only the tiniest minority of us can honestly say, hand on heart, they have never picked up a Big Mac once in a while.

 

 

 

[Joe Dubz]

5 minutes ago, DrBloodmoney said:

 

 

The primary issue with the current leaderboard, as I understand it, is one of nomenclature.

Because the general term used for people who try for platinum in their games is 'Trophy Hunter', PSNP is considered a 'Trophy Hunter's' website.

Therefore, because the leaderboard is featured on said website, there is a general misunderstanding that it is a 'Trophy Hunter's Leaderboard'... but that isn't necessarily true. It never has been.

 

The term 'Trophy Hunting' is applicable to some aspect of what we do, and some of what is tracked on the leaderboard, but not all of it.

 

The platinums for, some games are 'trophies', and achieving them does requires something of a 'hunt', however, there are plenty of games for which the platinum is more of a 'receipt' - a proof of purchase -, than a 'trophy' by any real definition, and achieving them is no more a 'hunt' than finding ones credit card is. 

 

There is nothing wrong with those games - either creating, purchasing or playing them - but the problem comes when we try to consider everything a 'trophy' and everything a 'hunt', just because we self-identify with the term 'Trophy Hunter'.

The difference between getting a Housemarque platinum for example, vs. getting Breakthrough Gaming Arcade platinum is the difference between stalking a deer with a bow and arrow, shooting skinning, and cooking it on a spit roast over a campfire, vs. going to McDonalds for a Big Mac.

 

The Leaderboard is not, and never has been, about how you got the meal - it is purely about how many calories you ate.

 

Realistically, there is no distinction between 'Trophy Hunters' and 'Receipt Collectors', and that can drive some self-identified 'Trophy Hunters' batty...

 

...but if this thread, and the myriad of threads that came before it have proven anything, it's that it will be difficult, if not impossible, to find an appropriate dividing line between the two.

 

Especially when only the tiniest minority of us can honestly say, hand on heart, they have never picked up a Big Mac once in a while.

 

 

 

I myself am definitely guilty of purchasing quite a few stacked Big Macs myself!! I certainly got sucked up in the wind of easy plats... It was very satisfying at first, at one point I think I popped 5 plats in 24 hours!! However that quickly grew stale and felt kind of hollow, considering there was generally little to no challenge involved with them.

 

With that being said, you do have some very valid points and I don't disagree with you there! Given the great divide between the 'Trophy Hunters' and the 'Receipt Collectors', I don't know that we will ever be able to reach a happy middle road here. 

 

I personally as of late have been going for UR stuff, but that's just my personal preference. I would much rather see a profile with some difficult games as opposed to stacks and stacks EZPZ plats, but that's just me. That's the beauty of it, we can all play however we want to!! I guess some who are more to one extreme or the other don't like this so much for whatever reason. I say let people play however they want to play!

[Helyx]

10 hours ago, TomataEighty9 said:

Ultra Rare= 500. (26) 13.000

Very Rare=100 (56) 5.600

Rare=50 (108) 5,400

Uncommon=25 (245) 6,125

Common=10 (193) 1930

 

 

Mine = 32,055 points

 

Is this how the current rarity leaderboard works? Forgive me for not reading all 18 pages to find the official values.

[sweeping-lamp3]

I believe the point distribution is on Page 16.

 

 

On 3/26/2021 at 3:52 AM, MMDE said:

 

 

yeah, you both agree. ?

 

You see ferryjan is right next to him too. grimydawg beat em both, by like 50% more points, and he's at 137 plats!  Danny, at the very top, is not even in the world top 10k.


In case anyone wonders about the point distribution:

 

points(50)=0
points(49.99)=1
points(49)=1
points(48)=1
points(47)=1
points(46)=1
points(45)=1
points(44)=1
points(43)=1
points(42)=2
points(41)=2
points(40)=2
points(39)=3
points(38)=3
points(37)=3
points(36)=4
points(35)=4
points(34)=5
points(33)=5
points(32)=6
points(31)=7
points(30)=7
points(29)=8
points(28)=10
points(27)=11
points(26)=12
points(25)=14
points(24)=16
points(23)=18
points(22)=20
points(21)=23
points(20)=26
points(19)=29
points(18)=34
points(17)=38
points(16)=44
points(15)=51
points(14)=58
points(13)=67
points(12)=78
points(11)=91
points(10)=107
points(9)=127
points(8)=152
points(7)=185
points(6)=233
points(5)=306
points(4.9)=316
points(4.8)=326
points(4.7)=336
points(4.6)=348
points(4.5)=360
points(4.4)=372
points(4.3)=386
points(4.2)=400
points(4.1)=415
points(4)=431
points(3.9)=448
points(3.8)=467
points(3.7)=486
points(3.6)=507
points(3.5)=529
points(3.4)=553
points(3.3)=578
points(3.2)=605
points(3.1)=634
points(3)=666
points(2.9)=699
points(2.8)=735
points(2.7)=774
points(2.6)=816
points(2.5)=861
points(2.4)=910
points(2.3)=962
points(2.2)=1019
points(2.1)=1080
points(2)=1146
points(1.9)=1218
points(1.8)=1295
points(1.7)=1380
points(1.6)=1471
points(1.5)=1571
points(1.4)=1679
points(1.3)=1796
points(1.2)=1924
points(1.1)=2064
points(1)=2216
points(0.9)=2383
points(0.8)=2566
points(0.7)=2766
points(0.6)=2987
points(0.5)=3230
points(0.4)=3499
points(0.3)=3798
points(0.2)=4134
points(0.1)=4518
points(0.09)=4559
points(0.08)=4602
points(0.07)=4646
points(0.06)=4690
points(0.05)=4736
points(0.04)=4783
points(0.03)=4831
points(0.02)=4882
points(0.01)=4935
points(0)=5000

 

 

[steel6burgh]

1 hour ago, DrBloodmoney said:

 

 

The primary issue with the current leaderboard, as I understand it, is one of nomenclature.

Because the general term used for people who try for platinum in their games is 'Trophy Hunter', PSNP is considered a 'Trophy Hunter's' website.

Therefore, because the leaderboard is featured on said website, there is a general misunderstanding that it is a 'Trophy Hunter's Leaderboard'... but that isn't necessarily true. It never has been.

 

The term 'Trophy Hunting' is applicable to some aspect of what we do, and some of what is tracked on the leaderboard, but not all of it.

 

The platinums for, some games are 'trophies', and achieving them does requires something of a 'hunt', however, there are plenty of games for which the platinum is more of a 'receipt' - a proof of purchase -, than a 'trophy' by any real definition, and achieving them is no more a 'hunt' than finding ones credit card is. 

 

There is nothing wrong with those games - either creating, purchasing or playing them - but the problem comes when we try to consider everything a 'trophy' and everything a 'hunt', just because we self-identify with the term 'Trophy Hunter'.

The difference between getting a Housemarque platinum for example, vs. getting Breakthrough Gaming Arcade platinum is the difference between stalking a deer with a bow and arrow, shooting skinning, and cooking it on a spit roast over a campfire, vs. going to McDonalds for a Big Mac.

 

The Leaderboard is not, and never has been, about how you got the meal - it is purely about how many calories you ate.

 

Realistically, there is no distinction between 'Trophy Hunters' and 'Receipt Collectors', and that can drive some self-identified 'Trophy Hunters' batty...

 

...but if this thread, and the myriad of threads that came before it have proven anything, it's that it will be difficult, if not impossible, to find an appropriate dividing line between the two.

 

Especially when only the tiniest minority of us can honestly say, hand on heart, they have never picked up a Big Mac once in a while.

 

 

 

And Picking up a big mac as I guess you're referring is a easy game, nothing wrong with doing so.  It just wouldn't count toward your total gamer score is all.  I've said before playing easy game doesn't take away from your good accomplishments.  I just think the wrong group of people getting the recognition on tracking sites, not just this one.  You look at hakooms profile and he says he enjoys watching his haters get upset over his success and I think what success.  Of course if you compare his profile to the guy who completed whored out his list to catch him hakoom looks really good.  I started hunting 5 years ago and I swear if it had been my goal I could easily be sitting on 3000 platinums.  But what a waste it would have been missing all these great rewarding experiences in games i've played to do so.  all said and done don't care what people do or play but we can decide the people who get the recognition and what criteria the competition is based on.  Is the reward for spending thousands of dollars on Rata stacks?  or is it going to be for the people who truly challenge theirselves?  I'm not going to be the top of either

board.  as a matter a fact probably be about the same place on both of them.  Yet I would rather chase a rarity leaderboard than the current one.  

 

Recently i played a game that may be considered a Ur whore game anomaly 2 but tbh I'm glad I did because every though you gotta boost the entire multiplayer experience the game and campaign turned out to be a lot of fun.  I payed a few big macs and never had a bit of damn fun.  Even some of the people who are at the top of the leaderboard curse rata games they don't want be playing that shit all day they wish their was a different system too. I'm gonna give up on the topic because i don't see it changing.   One mans junk is another mans treasure I guess.

 

Edit;  another way to look at it is only about 1% or less of this community have the time, money, and desire to spend their time playing Rata games for 1000s of hours to complete with the current leaderboard.  why do we have a system that favors the minority and not the other 99%?

Edited May 11, 2021 by steel6burgh

[Helyx]

13 minutes ago, sweeping-lamp3 said:

I believe the point distribution is

 

Well, so much for figuring it out myself. Thanks for referring to the actual method.

[TomataEighty9]

51 minutes ago, Helyx said:

 

Is this how the current rarity leaderboard works? Forgive me for not reading all 18 pages to find the official values.

 

I used to formula that the thread starter suggested see first post

[Helyx]

3 minutes ago, TomataEighty9 said:

I used to formula that the thread starter suggested see first post

 

Yeah, I saw the numbers he proposed, but he's not affiliated with the site and his values clearly aren't used in the current rarity leaderboard.

 

Other guy got me sorted, thanks anyway.