Legendary rarity

[MMDE]

On 7/27/2018 at 8:55 PM, Aeir_ said:

 

 

Oh how interesting. When were the rarities implemented in PSN?

 

Let's just say it wasn't available on PS3, and this site did it before the release of both Vita and PS4.

 

 

For those who think they would go for "Legendary Rare" if it was implemented. Don't you think others would too, making them not be "Legendary Rare" anymore? Good luck doing some near impossible trophy that a lot of other trophy hunters must have played without success. You'd need a significant amount of players for it even to be "Legendary Rare" in case only some extreme few got the rare.

 

Instead of "Legendary Rare", maybe "Extreme Rare"?  And I'd put it up to like 2.5%.

Edited July 29, 2018 by MMDE

[Angus1343]

7 minutes ago, MMDE said:

 

Let's just say it wasn't available on PS3, and this site did it before the release of both Vita and PS4.

 

 

For those who think they would go for "Legendary Rare" if it was implemented. Don't you think others would too, making them not be "Legendary Rare" anymore? Good luck doing some near impossible trophy that a lot of other trophy hunters must have played without success.

This is a good point. If legendary status were to be implemented the rarity of trophies requiring it would likely soar making it far harder to acquire. Overall in addition I personally feel it's rather unnecessary. Percentages already speak for themselves.

[AlchemistWer]

I think this tag can be nice in a game like SO 4. It definitely sounds epic. ? but at the same time maybe this new tag can motivate more people to get more trophies with less than 1%

[fastflowdaman]

People are still (and will always be) confusing "difficulty" with "rarity".

 

A rare trophy doesn't have to be difficult. Ex: PSN Plus games.

 

A difficult trophy doesn't have to be (ultra) rare.

Ex: Batman AA plat.

 

If many people succesfully attempt to achieve a difficult trophy and "downgrade" its rarity, the trophy is still difficult, but just not as rare anymore.

 

Ultra rare =/= ultra difficult and vice versa.

 

Edit: One more thing, difficulty is subjective. Rarity is not.

Edited July 29, 2018 by fastflowdaman

[Stardroid]

I think this is a great suggestion but it should be from 2% and below. What's the harm? Having played quite a few difficult games, I can definitely attest that the difference between 5% and 2% is usually huge in difficulty. We don't even have to look at it in terms of difficulty, just the rarity percentage is enough, really. Although Legendary sounds too cliché.

Edited July 29, 2018 by Starlove-

[Angus1343]

15 minutes ago, fastflowdaman said:

People are still (and will always be) confusing "difficulty" with "rarity".

 

A rare trophy doesn't have to be difficult. Ex: PSN Plus games.

 

A difficult trophy doesn't have to be (ultra) rare.

Ex: Batman AA plat.

 

If many people succesfully attempt to achieve a difficult trophy and "downgrade" its rarity, the trophy is still difficult, but just not as rare anymore.

 

Ultra rare =/= ultra difficult and vice versa.

 

Edit: One more thing, difficulty is subjective. Rarity is not.

This is a  good reason why 1 percent trophies would be far more rare.

3 minutes ago, Starlove- said:

I'm surprised it took so long until someone started enlightening us with the classical boring talk on the subjective nature on difficulty. Who cares? I think this is a great suggestion but it should be from 2% and below. What's the harm? Having played quite a few difficult games, I can definitely attest that the difference between 5% and 2% is usually huge in difficulty.

Very true, under 2 is generally difficulty related

[fastflowdaman]

1 minute ago, Angus1343 said:

This is a  good reason why 1 percent trophies would be far more rare.

 

I am also in favor of a new sub 1% rarity category.

[Paleblood]

I want to take my chance and finally coin the term ''super extra fancy bigfoot-unicorn hybrid level of rarity trophy''.

Edited July 29, 2018 by Paleblood

[marko_cruise]

Hyper is above Super. Hypercars are faster than supercars.
You could have Super rare, and Hyper rare above that. Both sound kind of stupid.
Ultra is defined as 'beyond'. And in audiology at least, super is above ultra, hyper above all. Think ultrasonic, supersonic, hypersonic.

But I do like the idea of an S Rank trophy being the ultimate, being above Ultra Rare. Super Rare would fit this, or Special rare.

[ProfBambam55]

on the topic of classification...technically, hyper and super mean the same thing...one is Latin, one is Greek in origin...they are generally considered less (rare) than ultra...i know there is super(sonic) and hyper(sonic), etc. but if you look at the root of how they came about you'll see that it was out of convenience when looking to create new classes...super was just translated and hyper was created...

 

ultra is kind of the ultimate in terms of defining uniqueness so something-rare might not work aside from possibly uber-rare...perhaps something like epic, elite, ultimate, supreme or, as suggested, legendary might work as well...

Edited July 29, 2018 by ProfBambam55

[Jarzor]

Edit: I don't mind anymore.

Edited August 16, 2018 by Jarzor

[Butella]

14 hours ago, Sly Ripper said:

 

We've had rarity since 2011, long before PSN added it. We also have PSN rarity here when you hover on the trophy.

 

So, what do you think about a sub 1% category?

[B4d4ssHunt4r]

On 7/27/2018 at 1:10 PM, GravityQueeen said:

And, man, we are playing videogames, nothing legendary about it hahaha

How dare you downtrodden in the name of the great GOD of gaming. Maybe you shouldn't game at all >:<

On 7/27/2018 at 2:38 PM, PooPooBlast said:

LMFAO so true

But why though :/

[MMDE]

3 hours ago, Butella said:

 

So, what do you think about a sub 1% category?

 

I think sub 2.5% would be better.  

[Darkette]

7 minutes ago, MMDE said:

 

I think sub 2.5% would be better.  

 

So that leaves 2.5% of room for an ultra rare? There’s barely any distinction. Anything under 1% is fine, they aren’t as obscure as you’d think.

[Potent_Delusions]

10 minutes ago, Dark said:

 

So that leaves 2.5% of room for an ultra rare? There’s barely any distinction. Anything under 1% is fine, they aren’t as obscure as you’d think.

 

^This.

 

2.5% is a horrible number IMO (no offense MMDE). I think 1% really should be the way to go as it leaves the Ultra Rare category very relevant (a 4% range) whilst making the "Legendary" category very exclusive. The absolute max should be 1.5%, but 1% preferably. 

Edited July 29, 2018 by Potent_Delusions

[Saionji]

Just my opinion but I think the rarities are perfectly fine as they currently are, its better to keep it simple rather than overload our profiles with too much stats.

[iHateTrophys]

A rarity named "Legendary" should more given for a 0,1% rarity instead of 1%. Sounds great if you can say i have xy legendary trophys ?

[Beyondthegrave07]

Can we call it "Raw" instead of legendary. I mean, we already have rare, very rare and ultra rare, what's more rare than something being raw?!?

 

I like the idea though. However, I don't think it really matters what we call it or what the threshold is for it (though I think below 1 percent is enough, put it any lower and this will be appealing to like 4 people, and it's a fair enough distinction between 5% IMO). It'd just be another fun statistic to look at on people's profiles or to boost our own ego in the end.

 

Personally, I'd be curious to see how many of these the top people on the leaderboard have since we tend to make the assumption that they never play super-hard games.

[IoIly]

I like it. I offer to remove common trophies and add legendary. But is it no problem what russian stratege.ru use already word "legendary" for trophies with rarity 5-%? 

May people offer and vote the name for these new rarity trophies? 

Edited July 29, 2018 by IoIly

[BlindMango]

1337 Rare  Anyone? Hello?

[MMDE]

2 hours ago, Dark said:

 

So that leaves 2.5% of room for an ultra rare? There’s barely any distinction. Anything under 1% is fine, they aren’t as obscure as you’d think.

 

It's a massive difference tbh.  

[PooPooBlast]

4 hours ago, ryan32289 said:

But why though :/

Good question well to me it's a hobby that's fun for sure but it's definitely one of the least important things an individual can do to better themselves in life. I mean it's exactly like television except yea it stimulates your brains little bit more.

 

Basically basically, it's just a hobby that's all. A hobby that I'm also guilty of enjoying

[Satoshi Ookami]

12 hours ago, nyonmyan said:

I would love a <1-2% rarity, but Legendary sounds kinda cringy. Maybe "Super Rare"?

 

SR < UR 

Gacha games show us that Ultra Rare is the top  

 

 

8 hours ago, Jarzor said:

I won't say anything else about this, I just wanted to share my opinion with the community, not creating/joining a debate.

As I said, let's not go there.

We've had more than enough discussions about this.

[Yuichiro-Akuhei]

I would rather stick to the sub 5% UR, taking a look at the sub 1% trophies man oh man, free to play massive online grind games, sports games which are shut down, overall many pinball DLC trophies, unobtainable 100%  games, many games with only 1 or 2 achievers, and then you still have your hard games nearly nobody completed congratz for getting plat/100%. I think not many people really hunt UR trophies, in general, I also think not many people care what they hunt because you play for fun of course, but I found it rather sad that somebody put a lot of effort in a trophy just to see its UR and not a ( topic :legendary trophy:)  also not many people really have a high UR count on their profile (like I said I'm sure not many people care) but then having a new category saying you have 0  sub 1% trophies is just yea.... 

 

also, people can always check your trophy log, or this can be something that sly could apply under stats if somebody is really curious.

Edited July 29, 2018 by Yuichiro-Akuhei