• Steam recently changed the default privacy settings for all users. This may impact tracking. Ensure your profile has the correct settings by following the guide on our forums.

Introducing points system (EXP) and cross platform leaderboards

edwiitos

New Member
I enjoy the site as how it is now but if RA does change then two leaderboards would be fair for both sides instead of alienating the softcore players like RA did with there rule changes.
 

Givos

New Member
I love your EXP System and how it makes games comparable across all platforms.

But there are still possibilities to look for „spam games“ and try to get EXP pretty fast and easy:
Games that have only a few achievements and one or two that are really hard to get.

„Kitten Rampage“ is a good example: It has 12 Achievements and 2 that are unter 1%. But the first 6 Achievements are unlocked by 70% of the players, and will give you over 600 EXP easily. In games like "Halo Master Chief Collection" you would need to unlock around 60 achievements to get these EXP.

Wouldn’t it be a better idea to calculate the overall EXP a game has not just on the rarest achievement, but on the average unlock rate of all achievements of the game? I have the feeling that this way the EXP a game could give would be a little bit more balanced.

Also the values wouldn’t go into the extremes, because a game that has an average unlock rate of all achievements with unter 1% doesn’t make sense. So the Squareroot wouldn’t be needed anymore.

My Idea would be instead of using
(sqrt(100 / UNLOCK_PERCENTAGE) - 1) * 1000 + 50

Something like this:
(100/(Total Achievements Earned/(Players Tracked*AchievementsGameHas)*100)-1) * 1000 + 50
Or easier written:
(100 / Average Unlock percentage) - 1) * 1000 + 50

I’ve calculated this formula in a spreadsheet for several games and sure, it changes the EXP numbers quite a bit, but it seems to significantly reduce the number of these „easy EXP Achievements“ I mentioned first.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1I-b41yi8MSDnwXl7KTf-o3v2_sv-D03w6FDIV0-7j1Y/edit?usp=sharing

Also the real Spam Games are still worthless.
I also have a feeling that games with a massive amount of hard to get achievements would be uplifted a bit in comparison to „normal“ games, even if their overall EXP would be lower.
And also Cross Platform Titles come a little bit closer together, because the average achievement unlock rate cross platform is closer together than the difference between the rarest achievements. (see Red Dead Redemption 2 and Elden Ring for Example)

I don’t want to sound like I could do anything better. I just have put some thoughts into this and wanted to let you know. Maybe I've overseen something obvious.

Keep up the good work! Like your site!
 

yendihunt

New Member
I love your EXP System and how it makes games comparable across all platforms.

But there are still possibilities to look for „spam games“ and try to get EXP pretty fast and easy:
Games that have only a few achievements and one or two that are really hard to get.

„Kitten Rampage“ is a good example: It has 12 Achievements and 2 that are unter 1%. But the first 6 Achievements are unlocked by 70% of the players, and will give you over 600 EXP easily. In games like "Halo Master Chief Collection" you would need to unlock around 60 achievements to get these EXP.

Wouldn’t it be a better idea to calculate the overall EXP a game has not just on the rarest achievement, but on the average unlock rate of all achievements of the game? I have the feeling that this way the EXP a game could give would be a little bit more balanced.

Also the values wouldn’t go into the extremes, because a game that has an average unlock rate of all achievements with unter 1% doesn’t make sense. So the Squareroot wouldn’t be needed anymore.

My Idea would be instead of using
(sqrt(100 / UNLOCK_PERCENTAGE) - 1) * 1000 + 50

Something like this:
(100/(Total Achievements Earned/(Players Tracked*AchievementsGameHas)*100)-1) * 1000 + 50
Or easier written:
(100 / Average Unlock percentage) - 1) * 1000 + 50

I’ve calculated this formula in a spreadsheet for several games and sure, it changes the EXP numbers quite a bit, but it seems to significantly reduce the number of these „easy EXP Achievements“ I mentioned first.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1I-b41yi8MSDnwXl7KTf-o3v2_sv-D03w6FDIV0-7j1Y/edit?usp=sharing

Also the real Spam Games are still worthless.
I also have a feeling that games with a massive amount of hard to get achievements would be uplifted a bit in comparison to „normal“ games, even if their overall EXP would be lower.
And also Cross Platform Titles come a little bit closer together, because the average achievement unlock rate cross platform is closer together than the difference between the rarest achievements. (see Red Dead Redemption 2 and Elden Ring for Example)

I don’t want to sound like I could do anything better. I just have put some thoughts into this and wanted to let you know. Maybe I've overseen something obvious.

Keep up the good work! Like your site!
I agree with a rework, not so much with the formula. Players should not be penalized for playing "obscure" games in comparison to AAA mainstream when it comes to exp. That just reverses the current problem we have where hard achievements in less popular games are worthless. The current formula definitely needs some tweaking, but I think popularity of game shouldn't factor too much into it.
 
Last edited:
Top