Can we make it so platinum achievers can vote on the difficulty of a game and also show that in the guides?

[kidson2004]

This is long overdue. I feel that some guides are based off of that author's experience instead of basing it on how the average hunter would go after said . I'm all for it!!

[FielVeredus]

1. Make it so the voter can only vote if they got at least 10% trophy score of that game to prevent trolling like many people here worried. It also help out that you already play the game and have some idea before voting. it is prerequisite to get more accurate and honest result. It should work better than PST.org because that site anyone can simply vote

 

2. When hover over community score it should show score distribution so we get the idea how people think about the game. Let's say 10 people vote 3 but 5 people vote 8 so it clearly this game has skill gap, it should help you in term of data better.

 

3. I think it is not hurt having this so i'm not getting why anyone would against this , if you don't like it. simply ignore it as it is not there same as before it even happened. I personally think this is very great addition to the site.

[Dragon-Archon]

13 hours ago, NathanielJohn said:

Do you even need to plat a game to write a guide for it here on PSNP? I could have sworn that I'd seen some guides by people who hadn't platted the game.

 

If so, it seems a bit backwards that someone currently can write a guide and *solely determine* the game's difficulty rating without having platted it, but perhaps when votes get implemented people would need to platinum it to vote? Why? If I spend 50 hours playing a game and give up on it since it's too hard for me to complete, I don't get to provide that information in the form of a vote?

 

I agree that there should be *some* barrier of entry to voting, but PS3T has used 75% trophy completion as its rough guideline for writing a guide and voting, and that seems like a way better solution than requiring someone to plat the game.

Unfortunately, no. The only requirement is that you must have the game on your profile. It's technically possible to have 0% of the trophies and still write a full guide and submit it for review. I don't mind that for starting a guide, as there are writers (myself included) who like to write the guide as they play the game. Though I'd prefer to have a requirement of 90+% completion before being able to submit the guide for review.

[Milktastrophe]

The time on the guide is good because it should reflect how long it would take to platinum the game following that guide. Random votes from random people aren't all going to reflect a time estimate for the same thing. Plus, they won't be accurate as things change in the game, whereas as long as the method in the guide doesn't change, then the guide's estimate should pretty much remain accurate (again this is assuming a scenario unlike No Man's Sky where trophy requirements become more difficult, but in that case the guide and the author's estimate should be updated).

 

For example let's say the Jak and Daxter games had guides that estimate 25 hours to plat. With debug mode discovered, let's say you can now plat in 1 hour. I think it's worth keeping the original guide and the estimate on it, since that's how long it will take to plat using that method, even though there's a faster method. It would be worth getting a new guide detailling the debug method mode with the 1 hour estimate (in cases like this, I don't think the original guide should just be updated, because the new method is totally different). With people voting on times, it'll get split on people saying around 25 hours and around 1 hour, making the average a totally inaccurate 12 hours.

 

I'm not saying we shouldn't have this feature, but it should either not be tied to a guide, or if it is then people should have to vote on how long they think it takes using the method described in the guide, even if they personally took longer, eg because they didn't follow he guide, or if they found a faster method.

[Dr_Mayus]

It is funny. I was looking at the Axiom Verge guide (as I am going to go for that platinum again) and PSNP has 2 guides. 1 has it as 4/10 (which signifies that there is challenge involved but with the right mindset anyone can plat it) and the other is a 7/10 (which signifies that while it is doable a lot of people will struggle).

 

So either people don't really understand how Ratings work or the people making the guides don't realize that the rating system should be designed to reflect the general public and not just themselves.

 

This happens all the time. If I am amazing a FPS or Fighting games I might rate a game 3/10 but the general public might not be able to plat Mortal Kombat or COD MW2 as easily as you and it should actually be 5 or 6 out of 10. (for example)

 

This is why public voting is needed

Edited December 26, 2018 by Dr_Mayus

[Z-Yux]

As a guide writer, I think this would a great idea in general. There have been some games that I written and constantly look at the difficulty and wonder if others would agree.

 

My main example is the "Hail To The King" Trophy in Final Fantasy IX. Mechanically, it's the most difficult trophy in the game by far, having to tap X in perfect rhythm for multiple minutes during a Jump Roping minigame.

 

There is a workaround to this trophy that requires some outside applications. If you were to use this method, then the trophy is pretty trivial in general. For those who are unable to use the aforementioned method will probably look at my 6/10 difficulty rating and think I'm completely nuts.

[Dr_Mayus]

19 hours ago, ARB1992 said:

As a guide writer, I think this would a great idea in general. There have been some games that I written and constantly look at the difficulty and wonder if others would agree.

 

My main example is the "Hail To The King" Trophy in Final Fantasy IX. Mechanically, it's the most difficult trophy in the game by far, having to tap X in perfect rhythm for multiple minutes during a Jump Roping minigame.

 

There is a workaround to this trophy that requires some outside applications. If you were to use this method, then the trophy is pretty trivial in general. For those who are unable to use the aforementioned method will probably look at my 6/10 difficulty rating and think I'm completely nuts.

I would just like to say that even with the Remote Play option it still is very hard. I tried for hours to get it to work and I got over 600 once but due to my internet...the game...lag...whatever it didn't work. 

 

I have never been able to get it past 100 since.

[Beyondthegrave07]

I like the idea. I go by my personal experience playing through the game and then try to scale it to other games within the same genre. I can see how this could be useful though. I Iemember someone commenting that my Ni No Kuni guide should be a 4/10 difficulty instead of 5/10. My argument was that there wasn't much of a difference between a 4 and a 5 and that the game is your average JRPG (hence, smack dab in the middle). However, I caved in and switched it to a 4 even though I personally don't agree with it. Something like this would solve that issue 100%.

 

Granted, you will run into the issue of "skill" or "luck" where some will call games like Crash Bandicoot a 1 or 2 and others a 10. Though, hopefully, the population even this out, but it's always hard to tell. I think people tend to overestimate the difficulty to either inflate their own egos or to mentally prepare someone who may not be as good. I've also heard of looney things where people give their guide a lower rating to inflate the number of views or player base. Not sure if any of this is true, but regardless, a population' opinion would be more beneficial than a single opinion IMO.

 

As for time, I base it off a typical experience using my guide. However, there is always, always some variance in it, and people should take estimates with a grain of salt. Some games require enormous luck with rare drops or have RNG elements to them which makes it impossible to pinpoint a precise time which is why it's usually put somewhere in the middle of super lucky or super unlucky. However, looking at the time, you don't know that nor would you know how others chose their estimate.

 

There's also the issue of skill, where it's not equivalent across the board. Crash Bandicoot can be done in a few hours or 50 hours depending on skill (I'd definitely be the latter). I'm not sure having a user estimated time would really help with the amount of variance possible for certain games like these. The only reason I think a difficulty rating is okay is because it is a lot harder to skew (10 options) than estimated time (literally take your pick).

Edited December 28, 2018 by Beyondthegrave07

[KondeBra]

I actually use the platinum achievers percentage to measure the difficulty of a game. Always worked for me.

[Quink666]

1 minute ago, KondeBra said:

I actually use the platinum achievers percentage to measure the difficulty of a game. Always worked for me.

 

Yeah that can give you some idea, but sometimes the % might be low because the game has coop/online trophies, is extremely grindy but still easy or recently went free on PS+ and the like. Making you think its harder then it actually might be.

Edited December 29, 2018 by Quink666

[ihadalifeb4this]

After seeing My PS4 Life thing I wonder if it's possible to get information how much time we played to get platinum. 

[Cassylvania]

Difficultly ratings right now are just one person's opinion. Makes much more sense to trust the community.

 

Guide writers will naturally be more familiar with a game than somebody going in blind, and that kind of bias will skew the difficulty, either because they're better at the genre than the average player, or because they think the average player will have an easier time with the game because a guide is now available. On PST.org, estimated difficulty polls are blind when you first go to vote, and I'm often surprised at how different my vote is compared to others. This includes games I've written guides for, like Shantae. Having other people's opinions makes it easier to give an accurate rating, and that's not a bad thing. 

 

I know some people freak out when an idea is suggested that is used by other sites, but really, this is a no-brainer.

[Sundr0wn_]

I think this is a great idea. The german forum i used when i started out trophy hunting a few years back, had those exact features and would display the completion time and difficulty rating on the game's main page!

[NaseemJohn]

I'd be all for this but the truth is that whenever an average or even hard platinum is out most people cry "impossible" without even trying or taking the time to practice, very few are willing to do so which is why I think the difficulty ratings will never be accurate for most people. You'll often see them say "I don't have the time" or "I have other things to play" when in fact they're just not willing to put in the effort to obtain it. 

Edited December 29, 2018 by NaseemJohn
Cause I can

[Quink666]

14 minutes ago, NaseemJohn said:

I'd be all for this but the truth is that whenever an average or even hard platinum is out most people cry "impossible" without even trying or taking the time to practice, very few are willing to do so which is why I think the difficulty ratings will never be accurate for most people. You'll often see them say "I don't have the time" or "I have other things to play" when in fact they're just not willing to put in the effort to obtain it. 

 

That's why you can only vote if you either have a certain completion % or the platinum.

[scemopagliaccioh]

Which percentage are we talking about? I have 78% completion in Injustice Gods Among Us and in no way I would feel confident to rate it since Battle Master is on a whole differnt level. I think it would be easier for people to vote only if they have the plat, or 100% if the game doesn't have one.

[Quink666]

Just now, scemopagliaccioh said:

Which percentage are we talking about? I have 78% completion in Injustice Gods Among Us and in no way I would feel confident to rate it since Battle Master is on a whole differnt level. I think it would be easier for people to vote only if they have the plat, or 100% if the game doesn't have one.

 10-100%. It's beeing discussed in this thread. Just read it. No one knows what would be the very best % since it varies from game to game. I would prefer that only platinum holders could vote if this ever got implemented. Since that way you know people giving score has done all trophies. Some games have 49 easy trophies and 1 really hard while other games have it reversed, so having votes based on% might not be the most accurate.

[scemopagliaccioh]

There is no need to be hostile, people judging a percentage is the exact reason why I posted  in favor of platinum or bust if you re-read my message.

Another example would be Wolfenstein 2. You can breeze 98% of the trophies, but the real hard work is that last 2%.

Edited December 29, 2018 by scemopagliaccioh

[Quink666]

30 minutes ago, scemopagliaccioh said:

There is no need to be hostile, people judging a percentage is the exact reason why I posted  in favor of platinum or bust if you re-read my message.

Another example would be Wolfenstein 2. You can breeze 98% of the trophies, but the real hard work is that last 2%.

Hostile?

[scemopagliaccioh]

"It's being discussed in this thread. Just read it" granted it's the internet   and you cannot see others physically so I apologize but it looked as if you thought I posted the message without reading anything from the thread.

[Quink666]

Just now, scemopagliaccioh said:

"It's being discussed in this thread. Just read it" granted it's the internet   and you cannot see others physically so I apologize but it looked as if you thought I posted the message without reading anything from the thread.

Wasn't intended to be hostile or anything of the like. I apologize if you found it hostile, had no intention of causing drama.

[mekktor]

4 hours ago, Quink666 said:

 10-100%. It's beeing discussed in this thread. Just read it. No one knows what would be the very best % since it varies from game to game. I would prefer that only platinum holders could vote if this ever got implemented. Since that way you know people giving score has done all trophies. Some games have 49 easy trophies and 1 really hard while other games have it reversed, so having votes based on% might not be the most accurate.

 

How about basing it on game completion/ranks? For example, letting only those with A or S ranks vote. Like you said, setting a fixed percentage isn't ideal, as that percentage means something different for each game.

 

I'd trust the opinion of someone who has put in the time/effort to achieve a percentage well above average, even if that's only 30% on a really tough game.

[BlackTorito]

Despite I aprove this, I would also like to note that votes are also based on personal experiences (and lets be honest, some trolls too) and does not accurately represent the difficulty, in fact, everything is susceptible to opinions. The truth is, the difficulty number should be an estimation on where the real difficulty is actually on. For this I would recommend to show both author and platinum achievers poll; this should result in an interval showing two values where the difficulty might be. The same applies to estimated time.

 

I would also like to bring the attention to guide ratings. I think the stars are not intuitive enough and there should be some kind of pop-up, or more intuitive section to show you can actually rate the guides you are using.

Edited December 29, 2018 by BlackTorito

[acasser]

I'm going to directly quote from the comments discussion to my guide for Record of Agarest War, explaining why I ranked that 3/10 even though every other site that does guides and voting seems to rank it somewhere around 7/10.

 

" My opinion is that a lot of those other sites like to bump up difficulty ratings several notches for "tedious", "time consuming", and "grindy".  I don't agree with that point of view. "

 

And along those lines, I'm not a fan of the idea that we need a community rating system.  All it does is replace one system viewed as completely arbitrary (the author of the guide) with another system that's completely arbitrary (namely a semi-selective group of random players that will be different from game to game no matter how you slice the voter eligibility).  Because everybody has their own particular and peculiar ways to judge a game's difficulty, and many of us are semi-unique and our points of view don't readily correspond to that of the masses or even a small tranche of them.

 

There are plenty of places to offer one's opinion on the difficulty of a game without needing to code a new system for it.

[scemopagliaccioh]

3 hours ago, mekktor said:

 

How about basing it on game completion/ranks? For example, letting only those with A or S ranks vote. Like you said, setting a fixed percentage isn't ideal, as that percentage means something different for each game.

 

I'd trust the opinion of someone who has put in the time/effort to achieve a percentage well above average, even if that's only 30% on a really tough game.

I thought about this too, but then you have games like Final Fantasy xv, new Spiderman etc that forces you to go beyond the plat. and buy dlcs, conversely there are also hard games that jumps you to A rank quickly like Space Overlord.

@Regarding vote spamming:

Frankly, I don't think there are negativities on this. Yes, maybe someone will spam 1 or 10 on all games and ridiculous game times but it's not like we're removing the vote done by the person who wrote the trophy guide, besides what do we do about games with no trophy guides like say the DMC reboot? People will have to go to other sites to gauge how hard  or time consuming the platinum is, so might as well add the option to vote, without having to add a gigantic guide to the equation.

Edited December 29, 2018 by scemopagliaccioh