DLC trophies' rarity is now based on who owns the DLC

[ASlimeAppears]

For one, you get a more accurate and realistic representation of collected data.

 

But since you asked, how is a statistic built on an incomplete/inaccurate/unverifiable variable pertinent to anyone?

 

Realistic?  Including thousands of people that will never touch the DLC is realistic?  That word doesn't mean what you think it means.

 

You do know your second sentence applies to both methods, right?  Neither of them are 100% accurate, or close to it.  But, including thousands of people in the calculations for DLC rarity tells me neither how rare it actually is, nor how difficult it is.  The stat is wholly useless to me.

[Memnoch]

  Neither of them are 100% accurate, or close to it.  But, including thousands of people in the calculations for DLC rarity tells me neither how rare it actually is, nor how difficult it is. 

 

This is basically what it boils down to - and a majority of people voiced that they didn't want the DLC to reflect 'rarity'

Edited April 23, 2013 by leprodigalson

[Brenden]

I really like it, for those bashing it, its almost impossible to determine who owns it or not (i'd imagine) this way makes sense and its better than nothing.

[mattybell2117]

Well, if all you are concerned about is actual rarity, then yeah, the next step is including every PS3 user. However, my argument is the old way treated main game and DLC trophies differently, now they are treated the same. Only people who we know own the content are included in the calculations. I am not actually pushing for us to include every site user in main game calculations. I merely mentioned it to relate how DLC was treated using the old way.

 

For what has to be at least the 5th time I've said it, I don't think dlc's rarity shouldn't only be based on difficulty. It's a contributing factor but that's not all it should be based on. The reason most dlc was so rare in the first place rarely had anything to do with difficulty, it was because it costs extra money or required extra peripherals and most people don't want to go that extra mile to get the game to 100%. The extra time, money, effort, (sometimes) skill, peripherals, etc are all what should go into the rarity and only comparing yourself to the other people that went that extra mile means that your %'s are going to be skewed. Very rarely is someone going to go out and spend extra money on a game they don't intend on finishing so right off the bat you're only comparing these trophies to owners who are, for the most part, more dedicated than a standard trophy hunter. 

[ASlimeAppears]

The extra time, money, effort, (sometimes) skill, peripherals, etc are all what should go into the rarity and only comparing yourself to the other people that went that extra mile means that your %'s are going to be skewed.

 

"I want rarity to show the time, money, effort, skill and equipment required to get this DLC trophy!"

 

"I'll accomplish this by including thousands of people who never put any time, money, effort, skill, or equipment toward trying to get this DLC trophy at all because they don't even own it!"

 

[BOOM540]

I like it!

Wondered today about Dishonored Dlc Trophies. There is one with 99% o_o

More than the easiest from the main Game. After reading this Thread and checking other Games in my List i love it. In the rarity i can see how difficult or time consuming a Trophy is, and with the new system i can see it much better for the Dlc's.

I hate it all time that Dlc Trophys count to all Statistiks, especially the Completition Rate. I don't buy a Game, it doesn't count. I don't buy a Dlc, it count. Theres Something wrong at this! Some Dlc's are more expensive than the main game like Most Wanted. Ps3 and Vita Version, both together for 40€. Only Ps3 Dlc's for this Game more than 40€!!!!

So i like the handling for Dlc's like main Games und would like to see that it someday count to completition Rate too. ( many "likes" in here, sorry for bad grammar, i'm an older German long time away from school ;-) )

I hate it realy that i Plat a Game or became a high percentage and here it shows me 20-30% lower. If i buy, it should count, if i buy not it shouldn't!!

In last years the Dlc Mania is growing, you can pay for Dlc before the Game is released. And it is growing more and more. Not far away and you could only reach 40-50% in main Game or pay the double Game price for Dlc's too.

If dlc's count without having them, why not all Games and Trophies in the World? Than you have quite real Statistiks.

[Aipher]

Realistic?  Including thousands of people that will never touch the DLC is realistic?  That word doesn't mean what you think it means.

  

Nice dodge on the question and completely deflect the discussion. 

It is realistic. You can't conveniently ignore facts because you don't like them. The fact is, DLC is part of a game. Whether those thousands of people decide never to touch the DLC is their decision. DLC may not be the core experience, but it is still part of the game. It is realistic that not everyone buys or plays DLC. It is realistic that if the majority of people haven't played that particular part of the game (thus not getting those trophies), it makes those trophies rare. It's the same case for core game trophies and DLC trophies - if less people have a trophy, it's rarer. It is realistic to use a system that encompasses the entire player base of a game, not just a smaller portion of unconfirmed players, especially when calculating rarity percentage. Before you go nitpicking on how we will never have complete data of everyone who has ever played, I agree, but I am talking within the scope of the site and utilizing the collected data here effectively. 

 

There is nothing realistic about using the new system where it is based on a number that is ultimately wrong and can never be proven accurately. Also there is the inconsistency of the new system when it comes to old games and their DLC, which are completely incompatible with it. Why would you prefer a system that isn't consistent across the board? 

 

You do know your second sentence applies to both methods, right?  Neither of them are 100% accurate, or close to it.  But, including thousands of people in the calculations for DLC rarity tells me neither how rare it actually is, nor how difficult it is.  The stat is wholly useless to me.

 

I never said the original method is 100% accurate, but it is a whole lot better than using incomplete/inaccurate/unverifiable data as a basis. That old stat could be wholly useless to you, but that doesn't change the fact that it's far more accurate. We get it, you like imaginary statistics, but a lot of us prefer stats based on factual data.

Edited April 24, 2013 by Aipher

[Memnoch]

Ok, this thread has probably lived much too long already, but lets go back to basics :

 

Sly didn't pull this out of his hat, there was a high demand for this impementation

It's possibly one of the most requested features, basing the rarity for DLC trophies on who actually owns the DLC (due to technical reasons, "owners" refers to users that have one of the DLC trophies).

 

 

So maybe it's best to agree that we disagree on whether it's good or bad, but that this was probably done due to the fact that a large majority of people asked for it, which is something that cannot be ignored.

 

Saying the same thing over and over isn't going to get anyone to change their mind, so at the end of the day, either Sly will take your suggestions on board on another update, or he will not. That's all it's going to boil down too, as this was primarily a function to answer to a demand, not because Sly wanted a moan fest

[ASlimeAppears]

Nice dodge on the question and completely deflect the discussion.

What did I dodge? You asked me how an inaccurate stat was pertinent to anyone, I explained how the old stat was not pertinent to anyone because it was inaccurate. I suppose I need to be more blunt. The answer is "not at all". The old method told me the "actual" rarity, which is a nice stat I guess, but tells me nothing about how hard or easy the trophy might actually be and it does a horrible job at rarity for a number of reasons. All the old method told me is "DLC costs more money so very few people buy/play it". Useful! That's common sense.

Meanwhile, the rarity computed when you only use the subset of people who actually own the DLC provides a rarity you can use to approximate difficulty and that knowledge is much more useful to the average user. Obviously there are outliers (single trophy DLC and packs that have a high barrier of entry, mostly) but it provides much more useful information about most DLC packs. What benefits were there to the old system besides a lot more ultra rare trophies? The rarity given provided no useful information.

Edited April 24, 2013 by ASlimeAppears

[Nasty_Rory]

In the old way if 100,000 people played played a game and 1000 of them had the Platinum trophy this was a 1% Ultra Rare

If 1000 people had the game and bought the dlc for the game and was awarded a trophy for starting the dlc missions this also would have been 1% Ultra Rare trophy.

Now if 100,000 people played played a game and 1000 of them had the Platinum trophy this is still a 1% Ultra Rare

however the 1000 people who got their dlc trophy have seen there 1% trophy become a 100% trophy simply because the 1000 are compared against each other rather than the 100,000 total owners of the main game.

So the changes do not alter anyones trophies, just how precious we have all become over the assumed prestige that we earn from getting ultra rare trophies even if, as in my example above the only skill require was to buy the dlc and start it.

This is a trophy hunters website and my trophies - for example Shift 2 Unleashed which I am nearly finished with - are compared against everyone elses to give a percentage. 61,622 owners, 943 Platinum Achievers, 362 100%ers. This already suggests that not many of the 61622 bought the dlc and indeed 2544 bought pack 2 and 1082 bought pack one (funny enough you can earn 6 trophies in pack 2 and only 2 in pack 1). So any trophy earned in any dlc is going to be rare as compared to the whole game, but its not going to be rare when compared like for like with the others who own the dlc. These trophies range from 30% to 90% achieved when matched against the dlc but they would have been 2-5% achieved in the previous assessment.

Do I feel hard done by that this has happened? No. I feel hard done by that my save fucked up and I had to start from scratch again when I had nearly finished this game, but that's a different kettle of fish.

Apparently Shift2 Unleashed sold over 1 million PS3 copies globally in the first 3 months it was on sale and since then it has been available on PSPlus as a free game.

61,622 owners doesn't seem quite right now.

So the truth is that we are comparing trophies with each other and not against the number of people that have actually bought the game.

And that goes for every game. There are over 500,000 Black Ops owners registered with this site, but Black Ops sold in the vicinity of 11 million PS3 games. Apples and Oranges.

Rarity has seemingly very little to do with difficultly when you move away from the main game to dlc. I know there are people that will bitch that this dlc is next to impossible or that one or the other one but it cant have been impossible as you had to get a trophy in it to even be able to compare these apples and oranges.

I am pushing 40, I play for fun, to de-stress at the end of a day not to measure my cock against someone who can put 50 hours a week into racking up trophies. I work those hours.

I dont feel the need to get every trophy in every game - my 51% completion rate would give Eburk heart failure but I simply dont have the time or patience to finish games that I don't enjoy - even if like Killzone 3 its only one bronze short of Platinum

With all said and done, when its earned my Shift 2 Unleashed platinum is going in my virtual trophy cabinet because it will have taken me time and effort to get it there.

Oh, did I happen to mention its a 1.53% Ultra Rare

Edited April 24, 2013 by Nasty_Rory

[Shahanshah1991]

I wish you would do the same for completion percentage

[mattybell2117]

"I want rarity to show the time, money, effort, skill and equipment required to get this DLC trophy!"

 

"I'll accomplish this by including thousands of people who never put any time, money, effort, skill, or equipment toward trying to get this DLC trophy at all because they don't even own it!"

 

 

 What the hell are you talking about? I'm referring to going the extra mile compared to a normal trophy hunter, which comparing to everyone who has played the game accomplishes. Comparing the %'s of some game's dlc only to the people who have earned a trophy in it is comparing yourself to more dedicated players. 

 

By getting the dlc trophies over people who played the game and didn't go for the dlc trophies is what shows the extra time, money, effort, skill, etc. Only comparing the people who have earned a trophy in the dlc just compares the most dedicated against the most dedicated which is stupid. I don't want to compare myself against only the more dedicated players, that's why there's leaderboards. I'll compete for fastest to plat or first to plat or just compare myself against people who are higher on the leaderboards than me. 

 

There are dozens of dlc trophies that just based on skill and time alone should be ultra rares and are now just uncommon or common. That's not even factoring in other dlc that requires additional peripherals or costs a ton of money or requires a bunch of people. Comparing yourself against only top tier trophy hunters makes having the 1 million+ users on the site useless. If I wanted to compare myself against more dedicated players, I'd use a smaller site like psntrophyleaders where most of their members are higher level trophy hunters. 

[Aipher]

What did I dodge? You asked me how an inaccurate stat was pertinent to anyone, I explained how the old stat was not pertinent to anyone because it was inaccurate. I suppose I need to be more blunt. The answer is "not at all". The old method told me the "actual" rarity, which is a nice stat I guess, but tells me nothing about how hard or easy the trophy might actually be and it does a horrible job at rarity for a number of reasons. All the old method told me is "DLC costs more money so very few people buy/play it". Useful! That's common sense.

 

It wasn't so much an answer, as much an explanation of something different, but I suppose this response is more to the point. I'm sorry you feel the old method was doing a horrible job, but at least it was doing it according to the numbers and doesn't rely on incomplete data (again, back down to an inaccurate and incomplete number of known DLC owners). When you look at a statistic called 'rarity', what do you suppose it should represent? 'Actual' rarity as you say, or a different number that isn't 'actual' rarity? I think that question answers itself.

 

And also a fun fact: you have to pay to get any kind of trophy, regardless if it's a game or DLC (unless you can get either free). Whether someone's money is spent on a new game or extra DLC, you will always be paying for trophies. What do you say about the guy who buys new games and gets trophies in separate games? Are they somehow more significant because he distributed his money over different games? If his money was spent on DLC with ultra rare trophies why does that somehow reduce their statistical worth and have to be calculated separately? People can do what they want with their money, and if the majority decides not spend it on DLC, it's entirely up to them. They have exactly the same access to DLC trophies as the people who earn them. There is no invisible barrier blocking them that makes those DLC trophies forever elusive.

 

Meanwhile, the rarity computed when you only use the subset of people who actually own the DLC provides a rarity you can use to approximate difficulty and that knowledge is much more useful to the average user. Obviously there are outliers (single trophy DLC and packs that have a high barrier of entry, mostly) but it provides much more useful information about most DLC packs. What benefits were there to the old system besides a lot more ultra rare trophies? The rarity given provided no useful information.

 

This isn't a discussion about difficulty though. Rarity is just that, rarity. It just happens that there are both rare easy trophies and rare hard trophies. Overall or 'actual' rarity should not be compared among only a subset, otherwise it becomes a relative comparison, which in its current form is almost meaningless in most cases (because of, you guessed it: incomplete data). This statistic could be useful, but only if it is derived from complete and accurate data.

 

Consider Batman: AC Robin and Nightwing DLC trophies which are at 80-99% common, can you conclude that they are easy or hard? Or Spelunker HD DLC trophies? Can you really say that among owners of those games that they are really that common? Older games which are excluded from the new system, like Killzone 2, GTA4, Motorstorm: PR etc. will continue to have very/ultra rare dlc trophies. Yet some trophies are really easy (KZ2) and some are very hard (Motorstorm, GTA4). However, their overall rarity is still being displayed accurately.

 

You just can't determine difficulty by looking at the rarity alone, and any notion that there is some magical formula that will help do that is ultimately a pointless pursuit. While there is correlation in some cases, it's simply not an absolute benchmark and I think you realize this already.

 

I think we can agree that difficulty is subjective and never a finite quality. So keeping that in mind it should be reserved for discussion and kept separate from factual data statistics. Facts cannot be changed, regardless of liking, feeling or wanting, and that's what I'm getting at right here. What someone does with statistics or what they mean to a person is subjective and entirely up to them. However, the statistics themselves should reflect actual known data accurately and not what someone likes, feels, or wants.

Edited April 25, 2013 by Aipher

[Vacio_Luna]

Guys,.. guise? Stahp. 
But no seriously, this has no effect on me what-so-ever. Just thought I'd share that for no reason! 

[Mikek1107]

Although I am quite unhappy that my rarest trophies dropped from 0.2 to nearly 6% but I still think this is actually good in the long run. Now we will really see which trophies are hard for player to achieve by playing the game and not by ability to buy DLC.

[Latikos]

If I wanted to compare myself against more dedicated players, I'd use a smaller site like psntrophyleaders where most of their members are higher level trophy hunters.

So you only want to compare yourself to less dedicated trophy hunters?

I guess, for some people that can make sense...