Njawl
Score: 9737850Posts: 40 Reputation: +9 Joined: 2020-09-22 |
Posted 2024-05-08 14:16
|
0
|
|
|
What if there was an opposite to First Score. An award of sort for playing the classics, old games we love or never got around to. It could be fun but I recognize that it could take some work to get it right. Should there be a time threshold for it to take effect and how long is considered late. 10 years? Then there's the problem with the passage of time. The future will crush the present with being late. Is there any way to make it fair for people that stops playing today, like in good for today's time or does that beat the entire purpose of it? |
|
Magnus77
Score: 36513197Posts: 2520 Reputation: +531 Joined: 2021-05-02 |
Posted 2024-05-09 01:28
|
0
|
|
|
Yeah, balancing this would be difficult. For instance, anyone playing and stopping completely within the first 10 years would then get 0 score despite only playing what would be considered classics. You could be "locked out" by already having completed the games but this could be balanced by new games entering the classic collection. Then it is a question of what has the most "value": those who played back then (who get 0) or those who play now (who get score). We could give the score to all, rebranding it as a "Classic score", but then we are talking about something completely different. Also, I don't think we store the release date for games but we could rely on the earliest date for the achievement being awarded to a (legit) MGS user – which would work for most games but not for those nobody knows about. As time passes, more and more games will be classics – it will slowly approach (just under) 100% of games. But we could perhaps solve this by limiting it to better known games so for instance spam games never will be classics (but it would then require more work finding and selecting games; some games would be classics for some but not others, all genres should be equally represented and so on). So either it is fully automatic and somewhat dumb and unbalanced or it is mostly manual and requiring lot of work on our part (which is very unlikely unless a lot of users want to see something like this). |
|
|
Njawl
Score: 9737850 Posts: 40 Reputation: +9 Joined: 2020-09-22 |
Posted 2024-05-09 08:33
|
0
|
|
| What’s your thought process for your first point? As an example a guy get 11 points for an achievement that came out 11 years ago and will always have those points | |
|
Magnus77
Score: 36513197 Posts: 2520 Reputation: +531 Joined: 2021-05-02 |
Posted 2024-05-09 12:23
|
0
|
|
|
I understood it to mean you only would get points (for this specific score) if you played late, lets say 10 years after release. That means no games will be 10 years old in the first 10 years' history of games and thus anyone playing and stopping in those 10 years would not get points in this new score despite playing games that would be considered old by today. For instance, Steam achievements was introduced in 2007 and as such no Steam achievement would then be old before 2017 (of course not exactly the same as some games were released earlier and then got achievements). So if you lets say played a lot of Steam in 2010 and 2011 but completely abandoned it in 2012, you would never see any of your games reaching the 10 year point and qualifying for this old games score (assuming you have to play them after the 10 year point). |
|
|
Njawl
Score: 9737850 Posts: 40 Reputation: +9 Joined: 2020-09-22 |
Posted 2024-05-09 13:54
|
0
|
|
|
That's sadly just the case. Achievements wasn't really that old in 2012. Goes back to 2005 with the Xbox 360. Perhaps in the future there could be a page that displays the best scores for that year. Then we could get an accurate view for that time period |