Does trophy rarity REALLY matter?

[dmland12]

How do I feel about rarity?  Well, I think it is nice when you attain a trophy that relatively few people have.  Getting a trophy like that does feel different than getting one for completing the prologue or the tutorial or whatever.  I suppose it's why I find hunting trophies to be interesting.  If there wasn't stuff like that to go for, I doubt I'd still be interested in trophies.

 

With respect to playing games with rarer or more common trophies, I do look at this, especially when looking through a sale at a bunch of games I'm not familiar with.  In part, it's a way of thinning it down to a more manageable list of games to consider to buy.  But, I've also noticed that I've just had a better experience overall playing games with some rarer trophies.

 

Put it this way, when you buy something that's lesser known (or start playing a lesser known PS+ game), it might end up being really great, but it also might be kind of average (or worse).  It's hard to tell.  But, I've found that even on the weaker titles, there's generally enough challenge to keep me interested.  And I do really like finding games that are sort of off the beaten path, but good anyway.  So, it's a good setup that works for me.

 

It's somewhat different with AAA games and I don't mind the rarity that much there because the quality is...  not necessarily better, but more predictable?  There's less range I suppose between a good and a mediocre AAA game compared to a good and a mediocre indie.  Still, I do generally like the game to put up some challenge.

 

That said, I understand that people come at trophy hunting with different mindsets and goals.  So, I don't expect everyone to see things the way I do, nor do I expect or demand that any particular game have a hard list.

[bosstristan]

I first play for the game per se. But if the game has impossible trophies, I'm not risking it. So far there's no 'awesome' game I've missed because it had impossible trophies. Ok, maybe ModNation Racers, that's my biggest regret.

[PhyrxianLibrarin]

The fact that you can hide games from your profile to impact the stats makes all the numbers meaningless. I could hide every non-platinumed game from my profile and make it look like I have 100% completion. So the fact that X% of people have a trophy according to this site provides very little information about how many actual human beings have that trophy.

 

It's a vaguely useful metric if you're the type of player who refuses to play a game unless they can get a platinum out of it, but that's about it.

[AJ_Radio]

13 hours ago, Arcesius said:

 

Yes. And also no ? I'd argue that there are valid reasons for avoiding either. It depends on what you want a trophy to represent. 

 

For example.. Would I enjoy a visual novel? Probably not ?, but even if I would, if I want to read I grab a book, I don't need trophies attached to a game that only wants me to press . I view trophies as something that is awarded for completing challenges, getting 100% in a game, enduring long grinds or overcoming huge obstacles. A low rarity goes hand in hand with this personal "interpretation" of what trophies represent to me. This is also why I like a trophy list to include things like ironman runs, or playthroughs on high difficulties, or speedruns... Because any player can still make the active choice of not going for those challenges or playing on lower difficulty settings, but a trophy should, in my opinion, be awarded to those that choose to go the extra mile. And this is honestly also the reason I go for 100% in all games I start. 

 

Of course there are exceptions, especially when using PSNP rarities certain games offer a decent challenge and are still common. I would never avoid these games, though, because as I mentioned above. the trophy still represents overcoming whatever challenge the game throws at you, it just so happens that the game is so good that many other players felt the same way ?

 

 

That being said, there are plenty of people that want the opposite from their gaming time. A good, relaxing game devoid of all challenge. If these players decide to avoid a game that is difficult... it makes sense in my eyes.

 

 

So yes, I might avoid an easy game. There isn't enough time to play everything anyways, and I just get more enjoyment out of overcoming a challenge. 

 

I take the middle ground.

 

I've looked at your profile several times before and I have to say you got balls of steel for going after some of those games (Crypt of the Necrodancer). It is far from impossible yes, but the challenge involved and the sheer hours required to 100 percent that game is not something I wish to invest in anytime soon. Plus being a rhythm based game, I would probably just give up anyway since I have terrible reflexes and I'm bad at them.

 

Personally my satisfaction doesn't come from completing challenges constantly, it's getting a game I wanted ahead of time only to find they were a lot of fun. Furi and Titan Souls I both enjoyed and they both offered a challenge, but they were not extremely challenging. That was what almost broke me on Super Meat Boy. You can debate with me however you want with that game because you said yourself you don't think it's not all that really challenging as you've stated in the past. But for me it was a massive challenge, particularly the last two trophies (Girl Boy and Impossible Boy) which took me a good 50 - 60 hours to get alone.

 

What a number of people don't understand is the participation trophy, and in recent times a number of games are all about the participation trophy. Ratalaika Games are participation trophies. You do a few easy tasks, you get your platinum. I consider trophies like the ones you get in Dark Souls for dying your first time to be participation trophies. Those aren't in any way challenging or come close to remotely being considered a challenge. Millions of gamers have gotten participation trophies, but going through to the platinum like in Dark Souls and Dead Space, that is what trophy hunters aim to do.

 

I try to go for games that offer some modicum of challenge and also go for games that are easy yet relaxing. Deponia and The Little Acre were both enjoyable, even though they were incredibly easy.

 

Your style of trophy hunting is different from mine, so in that respect I applaud you for going after some of those hard games.

[Arcesius]

5 hours ago, Spaz said:

Personally my satisfaction doesn't come from completing challenges constantly, it's getting a game I wanted ahead of time only to find they were a lot of fun. Furi and Titan Souls I both enjoyed and they both offered a challenge, but they were not extremely challenging. That was what almost broke me on Super Meat Boy. You can debate with me however you want with that game because you said yourself you don't think it's not all that really challenging as you've stated in the past. But for me it was a massive challenge, particularly the last two trophies (Girl Boy and Impossible Boy) which took me a good 50 - 60 hours to get alone.

 

Hey I never said SMB is easy.. ? In fact, it is the second hardest game I've completed... But it is far from the "10/10 Impossible to plat"-game, which really is its reputation... It suffers from the same things the Souls-games do.. It's a well known game known to be difficult even by casual gamers, and that gets accentuated too often. 

 

That being said, I would never claim that the game ain't challenging. It certainly is. 

 

And to go further in my approach to trophy hunting... If I have a look at the games on my profile, it really is the case that the ones I have to say I enjoyed the least are, maybe coincidentally, rather common games... Undertale, Typoman, Oxenfree, Persona 5 (ok not so common but still not my cup of tea ?),... So rarity often (not always) is an indicator for me personally of whether I will find a good challenge in a game or not. 

 

 

16 hours ago, victorrfuego said:

I just play any game that has my attention lol it’s as simple as that.

 

That's probably what 99% of players do... But that statement is independent of your initial question. 

 

You can play games with rare or common trophies regardless of giving those trophies any personal meaning. I thought this thread was about the intrinsic meaning of trophy rarity, or at least discussing what each of us personally takes from that statistic, independent of the games they play. 

Edited April 11, 2020 by Arcesius

[AJ_Radio]

1 hour ago, Arcesius said:

Hey I never said SMB is easy..  In fact, it is the second hardest game I've completed... But it is far from the "10/10 Impossible to plat"-game, which really is its reputation... It suffers from the same things the Souls-games do.. It's a well known game known to be difficult even by casual gamers, and that gets accentuated too often.

 

That may be attributed to the ridiculously low rarity percentages, because Super Meat Boy was a Plus title that most people never bothered to go beyond the one or two initial trophies. You can easily get the first few trophies in under a hour and you're already at an A rank. Crypt of the Necrodancer is much more deserving of it's low rarity percentages, and that was NEVER on Plus. Super Meat Boy is still more commonly known among gamers, and it gets that reputation because of it's hardcore background.

 

The Souls games are different. I played Dark Souls years ago when it first came out on 360. Couldn't get past the first actual boss (not the boss in the starting area) so I left it for a long time. There's been so much research done on the Souls games you're basically guaranteed to find a build that suits you, and every boss has been studied and analyzed. Then there's the co-op aspect, not just helping someone else kill the bosses but also dropping the necessary items for those trophies.

 

Demon's Souls back in 2010 - 2011 I would easily consider to be a 7 - 8 out of 10 in difficulty. Nowadays it's no more than a 4 - 5 out of 10. If someone is struggling or wants their hand held, they can just follow a video walkthrough on YouTube along with co-oping the monsters.

 

The difficulty for the Souls games is far blown out of proportion. You can make it a real challenge by beating the game at Soul Level 1, people have done it. Or going through those Chalice Dungeons in Bloodborne at a lower level. But doing that isn't required for the platinums. As a matter of fact there is a guy who was on NG+ 7 in Bloodborne and he beat Orphan of Kos using only his fists, as far as I recall.

 

People think 10 out of 10 in difficulty is considered impossible. It's not, that just means it's very difficult. I don't consider stuff at 9 out of 10 in difficulty to be the max rating. Stuff that is actually impossible I would rate a 11 out of 10 or something along those lines.

 

I hope I made some sense to you.

[KaKrackle]

I used to care. But now I dont give a fuck.

[DrBloodmoney]

The real rarity is all that matters - i.e the one on psn. 
 

the rarities on this site are not real - they are just the result of formulae that have been changed over the years, so of little value - and are so skewed for dlc that they are rendered actively misleading.

 

A game like RE5 remake - for example - comes with all dlc pre-installed for every player, yet for some reason this site still insists that you only ‘own’ it if you haVe earned a trophy from that specific set....

 

also, the requirement for a player to earn 1 trophy in a dlc list to count as ‘owning’ it, means all dlcs with 1 trophy should have 100% common value, right?

 

wrong!

 

oh, okay, so the site must be counting all players who own the main game as dlc owners then, right?

 

wrong!

 

oh.... 

 

so, wait...

 

is it all just based on an arbitrary formula that renders the rarity value obsolete?
 

you betcha!

 

? 

[AlchemistWer]

Umm, I don't think so. We se the rarity of each trophy here on psnprofile but if we see the "global" rarity on playstation is even less so we don't have an "official" ranking of rarity and if we follow the playstation rarity we can see trophies/platinum here that are rare how ultra rare or common how rare and yeas, we can say that the reason is because here on psnprofile are only trophy hunter while on playstation is everyobody in the same place but in the end even Playstation don't care too much about trophies like we do.

 

Edited April 11, 2020 by AlchemistWer

[PostalDudeRus]

Trophies dosen't matter.

[Gotakibono]

Personally speaking, I guess the only real tangible benefit to the rarity level for me is that it's a quick way to gauge if a platinum will be difficult or not. I'm still in the habit of going in blind when I first play a game to allow myself to sit back and enjoy the game for what it is. I only get my trophy hunting hat on once I see the credits roll, and the rarity level is a quick way to remind me that perhaps a guide might've been useful...

[AJ_Radio]

9 hours ago, DrBloodmoney said:

The real rarity is all that matters - i.e the one on psn. 
 

the rarities on this site are not real - they are just the result of formulae that have been changed over the years, so of little value - and are so skewed for dlc that they are rendered actively misleading.

 

A game like RE5 remake - for example - comes with all dlc pre-installed for every player, yet for some reason this site still insists that you only ‘own’ it if you haVe earned a trophy from that specific set....

 

also, the requirement for a player to earn 1 trophy in a dlc list to count as ‘owning’ it, means all dlcs with 1 trophy should have 100% common value, right?

 

wrong!

 

oh, okay, so the site must be counting all players who own the main game as dlc owners then, right?

 

wrong!

 

oh.... 

 

so, wait...

 

is it all just based on an arbitrary formula that renders the rarity value obsolete?
 

you betcha!

 

 

 

There is absolutely no reason to follow the one on PSN since virtually most of everything is basically ultra rare. It counts all the players across the Sony network that have played a game, not just people here on PSNProfiles.

 

Most accounts on this website aren't trophy hunting accounts, and still that is a mere statistic compared to the total number of players on PSN. Marvel's Spider-Man is a pretty good example of what you should expect on PSN. It's one of the most popular and one of the definite highlight exclusives on the PS4. The base game trophies have a significantly lower rarity on PSN, and if you look at the DLC packs it's even worse.

 

Caring about rarity on PSN for me is no better than going after Steam achievements. It's pointless, at least here on PSNProfiles there is a standard because we are in fact comparing our numbers to other trophy hunters, not just a few million casual gamers who just picked up a game, played it for a few hours, and dropped it never to touch it again.

 

9 hours ago, AlchemistWer said:

Umm, I don't think so. We se the rarity of each trophy here on psnprofile but if we see the "global" rarity on playstation is even less so we don't have an "official" ranking of rarity and if we follow the playstation rarity we can see trophies/platinum here that are rare how ultra rare or common how rare and yeas, we can say that the reason is because here on psnprofile are only trophy hunter while on playstation is everyobody in the same place but in the end even Playstation don't care too much about trophies like we do.

 

 

Pretty much why a lot of us are here in a nutshell.

 

[Xenoblast91]

On 11/4/2020 at 4:54 AM, Spaz said:

The Souls games are different. I played Dark Souls years ago when it first came out on 360. Couldn't get past the first actual boss (not the boss in the starting area) so I left it for a long time. There's been so much research done on the Souls games you're basically guaranteed to find a build that suits you, and every boss has been studied and analyzed. Then there's the co-op aspect, not just helping someone else kill the bosses but also dropping the necessary items for those trophies.

 

Demon's Souls back in 2010 - 2011 I would easily consider to be a 7 - 8 out of 10 in difficulty. Nowadays it's no more than a 4 - 5 out of 10. If someone is struggling or wants their hand held, they can just follow a video walkthrough on YouTube along with co-oping the monsters.

 

The difficulty for the Souls games is far blown out of proportion. You can make it a real challenge by beating the game at Soul Level 1, people have done it. Or going through those Chalice Dungeons in Bloodborne at a lower level. But doing that isn't required for the platinums. As a matter of fact there is a guy who was on NG+ 7 in Bloodborne and he beat Orphan of Kos using only his fists, as far as I recall.

 

People think 10 out of 10 in difficulty is considered impossible. It's not, that just means it's very difficult. I don't consider stuff at 9 out of 10 in difficulty to be the max rating. Stuff that is actually impossible I would rate a 11 out of 10 or something along those lines.

 

I hope I made some sense to you.

 

Still mind-blows me up to acknowledge that there is a person out there who could beat Bloodborne in less than 4 hours--. That's another interpretation you can give for trphies. The speedrun cheer and awe that in the gaming culture we give to the feats done by "common" people. The rarity itself just counts because it's an incentive for you to complete a game. As I see, trophies/achievements are purely personal, but obviously have the competition at its core. Games are that: little challenges that makes you wonder in abstraction the beautiness of a fictional world where YOU are the ruler. Challenge is where the true value comes for that rarity we are discussing here.

[AJ_Radio]

8 hours ago, Xenoblast91 said:

 

Still mind-blows me up to acknowledge that there is a person out there who could beat Bloodborne in less than 4 hours--. That's another interpretation you can give for trphies. The speedrun cheer and awe that in the gaming culture we give to the feats done by "common" people. The rarity itself just counts because it's an incentive for you to complete a game. As I see, trophies/achievements are purely personal, but obviously have the competition at its core. Games are that: little challenges that makes you wonder in abstraction the beautiness of a fictional world where YOU are the ruler. Challenge is where the true value comes for that rarity we are discussing here.

 

You're talking the fastest times out of thousands upon thousands of players who have played the game. That is pretty impressive.

 

I don't like to speedrun. While I don't shy away from speedrun trophies, I definitely don't go out of my way to try to land a spot on the front page in Fastest Achievers.

 

Having that challenge helps separate the casuals from the more dedicated trophy hunters. Participation trophies I will argue are essentially trophies just for trying out a game. Die for the first time. Complete the tutorial. Those are introductory trophies. Going beyond what the average person might do in not only getting the platinum but the 100 percent, particularly in games like Driveclub, is a challenge that can be overcome.

[Theladozz]

On 2020. 04. 12. at 2:07 AM, Spaz said:

 

Spoiler

There is absolutely no reason to follow the one on PSN since virtually most of everything is basically ultra rare. It counts all the players across the Sony network that have played a game, not just people here on PSNProfiles.

 

Most accounts on this website aren't trophy hunting accounts, and still that is a mere statistic compared to the total number of players on PSN. Marvel's Spider-Man is a pretty good example of what you should expect on PSN. It's one of the most popular and one of the definite highlight exclusives on the PS4. The base game trophies have a significantly lower rarity on PSN, and if you look at the DLC packs it's even worse.

 

Caring about rarity on PSN for me is no better than going after Steam achievements. It's pointless, at least here on PSNProfiles there is a standard because we are in fact comparing our numbers to other trophy hunters, not just a few million casual gamers who just picked up a game, played it for a few hours, and dropped it never to touch it again.

 

 

Pretty much why a lot of us are here in a nutshell.

 

I used to think the same, but now with the auto sync basically turned off for non premium members the sample size is just too small and inaccurate, because even if a user is counted as a game owner, their trophies won't be updated unless they manually sync... I can somewhat understand the site owner not giving a flying fuck about new (highly requested) features, but this is one of the key functionalities and it's basically screwed now for any new game.

[AJ_Radio]

1 minute ago, Theladozz said:

I used to think the same, but now with the auto sync basically turned off for non premium members the sample size is just too small and inaccurate, because even if a user is counted as a game owner, their trophies won't be updated unless they manually sync... I can somewhat understand the site owner not giving a flying fuck about new (highly requested) features, but this is one of the key functionalities and it's basically screwed now for any new game.

 

I don't think Sly Ripper really cares about his website anymore. I see him on from time to time but I have barely seen him do much of anything.

 

Eventually trophies will be for naught. At least I'll have fun going after them.

[MarcusPunisher]

What matters is only one thing and that is if you enjoy the game or not. 

 

I don't like this notion where the platinum rarity almost feels like a competition. This should always remain as a hobby and fun in the first place. Just because a platinum is easy, it should not persuade you from not playing the game, heck, some of the most fun games had the easiest trophies and I got into variety of games that I would probably never touched thanks to those platinums. 

 

If someone is bragging about it or complains how easy it is, they come of as very elitist and I would not take their advice whatsoever. Don't listen to those people. what matters is your enjoyment. If you want to challenge yourself, go for it. 

[Yukiko Miyamoto]

Not really, some people can just open the game on multiple account and the AI thinks they gave up on it and decrease the rarity. And if it happens to be on vita, then the rarity is a lie, since there are vita autopopping cheaters just there to destroy the rarity.