The Help Jeff fix Standardization of PSN trophies Thread

#1 Posted by StaticFalconar (4849 posts) -

Welcome to another Perch of StaticFalconar

 
 
Ok, we are all grateful that after a long time, Sony has finally given an API and GB blew up a little more by adding the ability to link our PSN accounts. What more, in an effort to be able to compare gamertags with PSN accounts achievement point for trophy score Jeff has taken on the task of trying to standardize them. Looking at his Infamous example, I thought he was onto something and agreed. Then I started to link my account and notice how some games give me a max possible score of 1345 (midnight Club LA) then there are ones that give us max possible 655 points (Mercenaries 2). Sure when you average them out along with the good examples like infamous, the overall score does make sense. 
 

Extending the Olive Branch

 

Yet I am not satisfied. So lets help Jeff out by giving suggestions as to what how GB can be the first website to have a good standardization of trophy/achievement points. If you didn't know already, this is the way Sony does their calculation of the trophy system. 
 
 Trophy Point Value
Bronze - 15
Silver - 30
Gold - 90
Platinum - 180

Level Point Requirements
Level 1 - 0
Level 2 - 210
Level 3 - 600
Level 4 - 1,200
Level 5 - 2,400
Level 6 - 4,000
Level 7 - 6,000
Level 8 - 8,000
Level 9 - 10,000
Level 10 - 12,000
Level 11 - 14,000
Level 12 - 16,000
Level 13 - 24,000
Level 14 - 32,000
Level 15 - 40,000
Level 16 - 48,000
Level 17 - 56,000
Level 18 - 64,000
 
 
Then this is how GB started doing things. 
 
   * Bronze = 10 points
    * Silver = 40 points
    * Gold = 75 points
    * Platinum = 100 points
 
No level system, just a raw score.

Lets build a Nest from Olive branches



Personally, I think they should take platinum trophies out of the equation since there is no 360 equivalent. Just simply make platinum worthless (as in zero points) since that is the trophy you only get when you have gotten the rest of the trophies possible. If there was a game what had scaled correctly under the current system of 1000 points = getting all the trophies in a game; the player that gets all but the last 50 point achievement (because its too hard of whatever) would have a score of 950, but the PSN player that gets all but that last trophy to get platinum would be out 100 points plus whatever the trophy he couldn't get is worth. So kill what what platinum is worth and bump up the value of everything else to make the math fit more right. 
 
 
Any other suggestions that might help Jeff fix the problem?
 
 
PS: Yes I have done a small search to make sure there are no similar threads already, and after hearing the Bombcast this week, I believe Jeff would appreciate a thread like this since he even acknowledged himself he would have to change the system to bit to make the points fit better.
#2 Posted by wefwefasdf (6729 posts) -

I like your idea of getting rid of points for platinum and just upping the overall point value of the others.

#3 Edited by MattyFTM (14423 posts) -

Completely scrap the gamerscore points system for both Xbox & PSN games, and replace it with a point value based on rarity. It would obviously need some serious thought before implementing, and I've just slung this list together off the top of my head, but something like this: 

Percentage of people that have the achievement
Points for the achievement (Giant Bomb Gamerscore)
 less than 1%
500
1-2%400
2-3%200
3-4%100
4-5%75
5-7.5%60
7.5-10%50
10-15%45
15-20%40
20-30%35
30-40%
30
40-50%
25
50-60%
20
60-70%
15
70-80%
10
80-90%
5
90-100%
1
 
This sort of system means that the points is actually representative of the skill required to get the achievement. And it also means that points can be assigned to Xbox, PSN, Steam and WoW in the same way. WoW currently has every achievement at 10 points, Steam at 0 points. It would be great to include Steam & WoW in the score calculation in a meaningful way, but with no grading or points system it is hard, if not impossible to implement into the current points system. A rarity based points system would work eaqually well with Steam & WoW as it would with Xbox & PS3.
Moderator
#4 Posted by get2sammyb (6412 posts) -
@MattyFTM said:
" Completely scrap the gamerscore points system for both Xbox & PSN games, and assign a point value based on rarity. It would obviously need some serious thought before implementing, and I've just slung this list together off the top of my head, but something like this:
Percentage of people that have the achievement
Points (Giant Bomb Gamerscore)
 less than 1%
 500
1-2% 400
2-3% 200
3-4% 100
4-5% 75
5-7.5% 60
7.5-10% 50
10-15% 45
15-20% 40
20-30% 35
30-40%
30
40-50%
25
50-60%
20
60-70%
15
70-80%
10
80-90%
5
90-100%
1
 This sort of system means that the points is actually representative of the skill required to get the achievement. And it also means that points can be assigned to Xbox, PSN, Steam and WoW in the same way. WoW currently has every achievement at 10 points, Steam at 0 points. It would be great to include Steam & WoW in the score calculation in a meaningful way, but with no grading or points system it is hard, if not impossible to implement into the current points system. A rarity based points system would work eaqually well with Steam & WoW as it would with Xbox & PS3. "
I think that's the perfect way of doing things. Obviously yes it would need thought and tweaking, but that would work awesomely. I think.
#5 Posted by MattBodega (1907 posts) -

I think the problem with the rarity idea is that rarity is measured in comparison to all other users on the site. That means that achievement scores could be CONSTANTLY FLUCTUATING, I imagine it would take a lot more work to build a system that was adjusting the point value of individual achievements and all users scores. 
But hey, maybe I'm just poo-pooing on the guy reaching for the stars!

#6 Posted by StaticFalconar (4849 posts) -
@MattyFTM said:
" Completely scrap the gamerscore points system for both Xbox & PSN games, and replace it with a point value based on rarity. It would obviously need some serious thought before implementing, and I've just slung this list together off the top of my head, but something like this: 
Percentage of people that have the achievement
Points for the achievement (Giant Bomb Gamerscore)
 less than 1%
500
1-2%400
2-3%200
3-4%100
4-5%75
5-7.5%60
7.5-10%50
10-15%45
15-20%40
20-30%35
30-40%
30
40-50%
25
50-60%
20
60-70%
15
70-80%
10
80-90%
5
90-100%
1
 This sort of system means that the points is actually representative of the skill required to get the achievement. And it also means that points can be assigned to Xbox, PSN, Steam and WoW in the same way. WoW currently has every achievement at 10 points, Steam at 0 points. It would be great to include Steam & WoW in the score calculation in a meaningful way, but with no grading or points system it is hard, if not impossible to implement into the current points system. A rarity based points system would work eaqually well with Steam & WoW as it would with Xbox & PS3. "
Um, not really. This would just give points out based the rarity of achievement/game you play and not how good you are at the game. Say a big seller like Halo has some hard achievements. The hardcore people that should deserve more points for doing the ultra hard to achieve achievement would get more points in the beginning. However, after much time has passed, and even the noob player can grind enough to get the same achievement. Under the rarity system the hardcore players would be punished down the line as they get less points as everybody eventually gets all the achievements. I know this system would totally shit on the easy to get pts games, but the same effect would eventually happen to the rest that doesn't deserve the same treatment.
#7 Posted by PhaggyBigNastyMcKill (564 posts) -

I got an idea, like straight up keep the Sony method of putting points in games. Then calculate out how much points it each PS3 game has. If the average number is say 1500points or something, simply do some math and the have a conversion rate of PSN points to achievement points. No more trying to figure out how much a trophy is worth, just a simple math equation solution.

#8 Posted by Drank_Stank (69 posts) -

um...what is the point?  do people actually look at others accounts and look at their achievements/ gamerscore?  I dont. 

#9 Posted by jakob187 (21729 posts) -

Who said that the PSN stuff needs to be a system that's equivalent to XBL's?  Make the PS3 stuff its own thing, and then make the XBL stuff what it already is.

#10 Posted by Seedofpower (3947 posts) -

I don't think Psn has to be added into the total. I think the 4 trophy types should to grouped separately.

#11 Posted by xatmos (78 posts) -

There's no problem if the game is multiplatform and on 360 or GFWL, just use those number correct? For PS3, omit platinum as someone said, and have the rest (bronze, silver, gold) scale per game so that the total points for the game totals 1000. Use a weighted scale so that bronze is worth a single unit, silver - double, and gold - triple (you can use different weights). So if theres 6 bronze, 10 silver, and 4 gold, that makes a weighted total of 6+10*2+4*3=38, divide the target total (1000) by the weighted number of achievements to determine the unit worth or the value of bronze achievements; double for silver, triple for gold. Easy and always equals 1000 or a little less if you truncate decimals. I don't actually have a PS3 so if this is totally stupid, my apologies.

#12 Posted by jkz (4049 posts) -
@xatmos said:
" There's no problem if the game is multiplatform and on 360 or GFWL, just use those number correct? For PS3, omit platinum as someone said, and have the rest (bronze, silver, gold) scale per game so that the total points for the game totals 1000. Use a weighted scale so that bronze is worth a single unit, silver - double, and gold - triple (you can use different weights). So if theres 6 bronze, 10 silver, and 4 gold, that makes a weighted total of 6+10*2+4*3=38, divide the target total (1000) by the weighted number of achievements to determine the unit worth or the value of bronze achievements; double for silver, triple for gold. Easy and always equals 1000 or a little less if you truncate decimals. I don't actually have a PS3 so if this is totally stupid, my apologies. "
Hrm, that seems fine to me. Since there's less variation the value of trophies than there is in points for achievements, this wouldn't be throwing anything out of wack so much as it would be adjusting the system to fit GB's way of calculating scores.
#13 Posted by NinjaHunter (973 posts) -
@jakob187: Well, Giant Bomb wants to be able to compare everybody with a single score. So that people that have multiple consoles won't have to keep track of so many numbers. 

#14 Posted by MasturbatingBear (1781 posts) -

or just keep what actually works. Instead of implementing one of the horrible idea posted here. 

#15 Posted by MasterOfPenguins_Zell (2093 posts) -

I don't want to compare my trophies with my gamerscore, or my gamerscore with anyone else trophies. I want to just compare Gamerscore with Gamerscore and trophies with trophies. 
 
The total GB gamerscore is pretty cool though.

#16 Posted by PhaggyBigNastyMcKill (564 posts) -
@jakob187: You are totally missing the point that Jeff is trying to go for.
 
 
 
@MasturbatingBear said:
" or just keep what actually works. Instead of implementing one of the horrible idea posted here.  "

Not not working now, in fact Jeff has stopped updating the PSN links until he gets it fixed.
#17 Posted by Diamond (8634 posts) -
@EffMeHarderNi666Az said:
" Instead of changing the PSN numbers only, why not have a conversion rate for all the systems to GB points? "
Probably would be the most balanced, but then you'd also be converting hundreds of 360 games achievements and the problem would be 4 times bigger
#18 Posted by Shadow (4988 posts) -

Bronze needs to be worth exactly half of silver, regardless of the way it's implemented, I think that would fix a lot of problems with the system.

#19 Edited by ParaParaKing (104 posts) -

With  
Bronze = 3pts
Silver = 6 pts
Gold = 18 pts
Platinum = 36

most games have a total of about 240 pts.
 
So if you multiply by 4 you get:
Bronze = 12 pts
Silver = 24 pts
Gold = 72 pts
Platinum = 144 pts

And every game gets roughly 1000 pts.
 
Or you could go the other route and say Platinum trophies are extra to the total resulting in
Bronze = 15
Silver = 30
Gold = 90
Platinum = set amount for completion bonus

#20 Posted by Polypinoon (8 posts) -

I don't wanna piss on your parade, but 4 times 240 equals 960, not 1000. You suck at math.

#21 Posted by eroticfishcake (7787 posts) -

Also no PS3 trophy support for GB anymore.

#22 Posted by MeierTheRed (4941 posts) -
@jakob187 said:
" Who said that the PSN stuff needs to be a system that's equivalent to XBL's?  Make the PS3 stuff its own thing, and then make the XBL stuff what it already is. "
Excatley.
#23 Edited by KamasamaK (2409 posts) -
@pornstorestiffi said:

" @jakob187 said:

" Who said that the PSN stuff needs to be a system that's equivalent to XBL's?  Make the PS3 stuff its own thing, and then make the XBL stuff what it already is. "

Excatley. "
Uh, Jeff did on the Bombcast. That's what this thread is based on. GB wants to continue providing a universal score that doesn't favor one platform over the other.
 
 
The problem is if you use fixed point values then it likely won't add up correctly. The values need to scale per game, or per Matty's suggestion by rarity.
 
For example, if the Platinum were ignored then multiplatform titles could share the point values. Or for exclusives, you could obtain the value of the Bronze trophy by solving for B in B = 1000/(b + 2s + 6g) where b, s, and g are the numbers of Bronze, Silver, and Gold trophies available in the game, respectively. And the value of Silver would be 2B and Gold would be 6B. But the problem then arises that values are probably not integers and truncating will cause the values to not add  up to 1000. I kind of like ParaParaKing's suggestion of the platinum being worth whatever remaining amount would add up to 1000. Or 1000 can be replaced with 200 for those smaller games with no Platinum.
#24 Posted by MAN_FLANNEL (2462 posts) -

THERE IS NO TROPHY SUPPORT ANYMORE!

#25 Posted by Keeng (1002 posts) -

I think ParaParaKing has the right idea as far as what to do with Platinums. If I were designing the system, I would have each console separated but I do understand why GB isn't doing it this way. 

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.