Site Wishlist - Archive Forum

Archived site wishlist posts

Request for a change in TA Ratio calculation in DLCs

Dr HErB Gudaria
Dr HErB Gudaria
Posted on 17 February 12 at 16:44, Edited on 19 October 12 at 12:37 by jphil03
VOTE NOW: - Request for a change in TA Ratio calculation in DLCs

Spreadsheet of stats:

Hi everyone,

I know that this has been discussed to death but I still think that those ratios are not fair, specially for those we use the "Include all DLC" option.

These are my points:

1. This site changed the way DLC is calculated several times and is giving lots of troubles because not everyone agrees how it should be done.

2. TA now gives us the option to select how we want to calculate it so it affects differently to the completion percentage depending on what we choose, which is abolutely fair. The more options we have, more people is happy and that's cool for me.

3. The more I talk with people who always use the "Include all DLC" option, the more I see that most of us don't think that is very fair just to count the % different and it should also affect some other stats, such as the TA Ratio.

4. At the end, we want to see the stats the way that fit in our idea of what gaming is and how it should be calculated.

5. Those that use the "include all DLC" option, don't think that the DLC is something separate from the game. It doesn't matter which is the reason you see to not get or complete the DLC. Even if its money, not having the game anymore or not being able to complete it because it sucks or you suck at the game... If you don't complete the DLC the game is not completed. We really believe that DLC is part of the game and the reason why it exists is just about how the gaming market and industry works nowadays, the idea of game is different now, but a game is a game, not a game+DLC.

6. Just imagine yourselfs back in the 80-90s. Playing those Mario games. I won't probably find a gamer that could say that he has completed those games if he has not played every level and map. If there was not DLC was simply because the industry worked different, they were still thinkin about how to get the money from us, selling a product, just like they do it today.

7. I know there are DLCs that suck, just multiplayer, very expensive, not worth getting... but that's not a reason to count it separately.

8. I'm only looking to see if most of the gamers that use the "Include all DLC" option want to see a change on how the TA Ratio is calculated for us and it fits better to our idea of what a game is.

9. Those who think that we do it just to boost our ratio, is not that simple. I really don't care too much about the stats but just want to see mine the way I want them, just like those who use the other options. But anyway, if those that use the "Include DLC I own" have their % boosted, I think that we really deserve a benefit for using the all DLC option. By the way, if this happens, I hope I don't see anyone using the other option changing now to all DLC to boost the TA Ratio, that'll be very sad, at least IMO.

10. I'll like TA to make a poll that only those that are using the all DLC option vote and decide how they want to have their stats.

Thanks for reading and comment politely please, don't want this to become another childish discussion.

With all my respect to all the gamers and site users. This is my opinion, not what it really is. Everyone has his/her idea of how this should be done. But I really think that what I've written is what most people that use the all DLC option want, and won't affect to those gamers using the other options.

Cheers and peace



PD: Sorry for my English, I try my best! smile
Posted on 17 February 12 at 17:13
I really wish all stats could be the same but then we wouldn't have options but I completely agree ratio should match %.

DLC I own works for me because I dislike DLC with a passion and I like to keep clear of it as most DLC ratios are very low.

Sorry if I make little to no sense it's 4am. It's been a hard days night and I've been working like a dog..

Removed Gamer
Gamer has been removed
Posted on 17 February 12 at 17:40
I'd love to have the option to calculate DLC ratios differently. I buy and finish the DLC for every game that I own and I would love to see that effort rewarded by having the TA values for those achievements be weighted the same way that "regular" achievements are.

I know that one of the common refrains that you hear frequently is "I don't want to be forced to buy the DLC". Frankly, you aren't being "forced". When you play an Xbox (or PS3) game nowadays, you're buying into a particular business model. That business model includes the option for followup content in the form of DLC. If you don't like the DLC, you're free not to buy it the same way you're free not to buy any retail or arcade game.

The bottom line for me is that the developers consider the DLC to be an equal part of the game, Microsoft considers the DLC to be an equal part of the game, and it would be nice if TA considered DLC to be an equal part of the game as well.

I understand that there are probably issues regarding the site resources when you start talking about calculating different sets of values for different users, but a solution was found to handle the DLC-completion percentage issue. Is there any chance that a similar workaround could be developed for DLC True Achievement values and ratios? If so, I would be absolutely ecstatic. This site has done a good job catering to people with different preferences for their gaming statistics and this would be another level of flexibility and customization. Let's face it, we're all different people and we like options when we're evaluating and displaying our gaming accomplishments.

Hopefully you guys consider it. Thanks!
Posted on 17 February 12 at 18:16
I agree dlc ratios should be worked out from how many people have played the game not just the dlc.
Posted on 17 February 12 at 19:19
A complete game is not complete if it has downloadable content with achievements associated to it that has not been acquired. Measuring the ratio on DLC achievements only counting people that has unlocked an achievement from the DLC is not just unfair it is absurd. It can not be discussed whether a game is complete without the DLC or not. Plenty of people want to make they own rules because those already in place does not suit them. Outside of TA running around saying you completed Ninja Gaiden 2 for instance without the DLC will not hold water even for a second. Sure, it is an accomplishment in itself.. But it is still not complete.
The only ones who can dictate the rules are Microsoft and it is and has always been clear that a games is not complete without the DLC. Just look at the dashboard statistics.
Personally I did not appreciate there being different options regarding how to measure completion procentage. DLC achievements ratios should be measured from how many people own the game. Period. That would be the only way to get a fair ratio on them.
You must exclude one thing in order to obtain another.
Spaulding Nuts
Posted on 17 February 12 at 20:34
Totally agree!!
United Nations Space Command
IXI FalcoN
IXI FalcoN
Posted on 17 February 12 at 21:09
I agree 100% and have been an advocate of some kind of change to the DLC ratio system for quite some time now. Anyone who uses the "include all DLC" option has likely noticed that most, if not all, DLC ratios are severely undervalued. DLCs almost always have low ratios because they pull their data from a smaller pool of numbers then the stock game.

If you elect to include all DLC as part of the game, then you also elect to believe that a game is not complete without its DLC. And if you subscribe to that belief, you also likely agree that DLC achievements should pull their ratios from the same data pool as the stock achievements. It's only fair to match the same options as completion percentage.
Posted on 17 February 12 at 22:31, Edited on 17 February 12 at 22:32 by alklein92201
The point of ratios is to show how difficult / time consuming an achievement is. Yes, they are inaccurate right now. But if 10,000 people played a game, and 100 people have the extremely easy DLC, those ratios are still going to be crazy. Just because you played a game but not a DLC, doesn't mean you should be making other gamers look like they've done something that's difficult. Yes, harder DLCs will be more accurate. But easier DLCs will also be more INaccurate. You're trading one inaccuracy for another, nothing more.

I'm not saying the DLC ratios are inaccurate, because everyone knows they aren't. But your suggestion (which yes, has been suggested and discussed to death like you mentioned, why start a new thread instead of going back to another) doesn't make them any more accurate. It just boosts your ratio, score, and ego. The problem with the people suggesting we change the DLC ratio calculations is that A) They almost always suggest the same thing, use all players not just DLC, or B) They don't offer a suggestion at all. Just because your suggestion makes your scores look better doesn't mean your suggestion is better. You just want Inaccuracy A instead of Inaccuracy B because A makes you look like you do harder things, including making very easy things look hard.

Darken81 said:
DLC achievements ratios should be measured from how many people own the game. Period. That would be the only way to get a fair ratio on them.
But that isn't fair. Hell, it isn't even MORE fair than the current way. It's just as bad. Gamer A making Gamer B look better because Gamer A didn't buy a DLC is just as bad as Gamer B looking worse because Gamer A didn't buy the DLC.
Dr HErB Gudaria
Dr HErB Gudaria
Posted on 17 February 12 at 23:18, Edited on 17 February 12 at 23:25 by Dr HErB Gudaria
Well, I disagree with almost everything that you say alklein. lol

First of all, and as I see that you like accuracy. The TA Ratio shows more accurately how rare and achievement is rather than how hard it is. Because if it shows the difficulty, that will mean that every achievement with the same ratio should be as hard to get, for example, every achievement with a ratio of 4 should have the same difficulty. And I guess that after all the time that we have been around here, we have already noticed that this never happens. There are a lot of easy achievements with high ratios and lots of hard with ratios of 1 or 2.

An achievement can be rare for lots of reasons, including of course difficulty, but there are many other reasons that make the ratios boost. For those that count all the DLC, not buying the DLC is a factor that makes the ratio grow, the same way that if someone gets bored of a game and doesn't play it to the end.

Saying that we want to boost our stats is just a simple argument. If we really want to boost our stats, we'll start for not choosing the all DLC option.

I'm just saying that those like me who use the all DLC option deserve the opportunity to have the stats the way we believe they are. And I really think that it makes more sense if the DLC ratios, just in our case, are calculated using every gamer that has the game, cause we want our stats calculated like we think they should be, the same way that you got yours using just the DLC owners or whatever you have.

I really think is more fair and it becomes closer to what the all DLC option users have in mind when looking their stats.

Falcon and Andrew explained it really well, better than me with my poor english.


PD: I know that this has been discussed before, but not sure if anyone pointed that this option should be only for those who have the all DLC option.

PD2: I want to add that the difficulty is something subjective, cause this is not the same for every gamer. Something easy for me can be difficult for others and vice versa. So the rarity is what really the TA Ratio mathematically calculates, not the real difficulty that a gamer can have getting an achievement.

Removed Gamer
Gamer has been removed
Posted on 17 February 12 at 23:21
To be clear, I'm not advocating that we change the way things are calculated for everyone. Just that people have their options. In that regard, how is this any different from the discussion that took place regarding completion percentage? People can choose to ignore DLC and feel good about their completion percentage while others can choose to include all DLC. What's wrong with wanting to be able to change the way I see TA values calculated?

This entire site is based, fundamentally, on ego stroking. It was started to provide a way to calculate the "true" value of an achievement, so you can tell the difference between Avatar: The Burning Earth and Lost Planet 2. This is just a personalized, logical extension of that original vision. As long as the coding isn't a giant pain in the ass and the servers can handle the increased load necessary to calculate scores based on user preferences, I don't really see how someone could be really opposed to the idea that more options are better.
Posted on 17 February 12 at 23:33, Edited on 17 February 12 at 23:34 by alklein92201
If you're talking about only making YOU see that new ratio, I agree that would be nice. But think of all the stats we'd be storing. No/Owned DLC stats, and All DLC stats for everyone. For ratio, completion, TA score, rankings for every stat related to those.

@Dr Herb -- This is directly from the TA page about why he started it

We believe the harder an achievement is to obtain, the more points should be received.
Ratio isn't simply about rarity. It's about how difficult it is to obtain. If I haven't bought a DLC yet, does that mean it's hard for me to get that achievement? Not at all, it means I haven't even tried.

The Completion % vs DLC ratios are completely different subjects. DLC are part of a game, yes. Completing a game means completing every part of it.

But you're talking about how hard achievements appear to be, whether that's what you want ratios to be based on or not. That's what they are meant to be based on, period. Not owning a DLC doesn't mean an achievement was too hard, it means you haven't bothered trying.

With DLC ratios, the old "should we count people without the game" argument applies, unlike in completion %. With completion %, DLC is part of the game. You can't complete a game if you haven't completed every part of it. So obviously, no, people without the game should factor into completion. But when your talking about something that shows how hard / time consuming something is, that argument applies. You're talking about making something look harder just because someone hasn't touched it.


Saints Row 2Party TimeThe Party Time achievement in Saints Row 2 worth 57 pointsHost or play in a party match on Xbox LIVE

for example. With your suggestion, it gets a 3.25 ratio. Just for starting a game with a friend, nothing more. You're telling me that's more accurate?

There needs to be a cutoff point where we stop letting every single user change their stats in whatever way they want. With completion, other people can't see it, and it isn't much of a hold on server space because it's only one stat.

Maybe after this, we should allow people to count a game as complete because they finished all Main Storyline achievements, or let people count towards ratios because they've played a game in the same genre. This suggestion isn't accurate. Again, you're just trading one inaccuracy for another that boosts your stats. If you find a way that makes ALL achievements more accurate, I'm behind you 100%, as will probably every single TA user and it will likely be a guaranteed change. But this solution, it just makes people look better for not only things that should look better, but things that, in all honesty, should look worse than they already are.

I know I'm coming off sounding like a dick, but I'm not trying to. I'm all for changing the DLC ratios, but not just to make our stats look better, but in a way that's actually more accurate all around the table, not just improving some inaccuracies while hurting others.

Removed Gamer
Gamer has been removed
Posted on 17 February 12 at 23:41, Edited on 17 February 12 at 23:50 by
alklein92201 said:
If you're talking about only making YOU see that new ratio, I agree that would be nice. But think of all the stats we'd be storing. No/Owned DLC stats, and All DLC stats for everyone. For ratio, completion, TA score, rankings for every stat related to those.
I think you get a little carried away with the slippery slope argument. No one is ever going to advocate that a game be considered complete just because the main storyline is finished or anything like that. It's pretty clear that there are only a few real ways that people accept a game being considered complete — the original points or the original + DLC.

There are some other weird issues with ratios as well. For example, you have cases where achievements were glitched or insanely difficult and then patched later. The arcade game Hydrophobia is a good example of that. The ratios are still high because they reflect an earlier situation, not the current reality. It seems unlikely that the game will ever receive enough attention for the ratios and scores to accurately reflect how easy it is to get the full 200 points in the game.

My point is, and if I'm reading you correctly I think you agree with me here, that it's an imperfect system. Couple that with the fact that different people game in different ways and have different opinions about what's important to them when they're looking at or comparing gaming statistics. We already allow people to filter leaderboards based on their score, like ranking completion percentage and only including people with 100K+ scores, for example. Why not allow people to see what their DLC would be worth if it was treated as part of the entire game? That's what I consider it to be and I'd really like to be able to see what my score would look like if it's calculated that way.

I agree that there would be a lot of stats being stored. No question about that whatsoever. If it's possible for the site to handle it, I still don't see a downside to it. I have no experience with coding or website hosting, so all I can really do is ask nicely and see what the web geniuses say about it.
Posted on 18 February 12 at 00:07
I guess I'm just not seeing the point in Rich putting the time and work into stats looking harder or more grindy based on people who haven't even tried it. Don't get me wrong, I agree that DLC is part of the game. My setting always has been, and always will be, Include All DLC. But saying you haven't completed the game without completing every part is different than saying that a certain achievement should appear more difficult or grindy because of people who haven't touched it. I only know certain programming languages, but of the ones I know, there would be much more work than it's worth to implement storing even more sets of stats for the same thing, plus having leaderboards filtered and sorted multiple ways because of various combinations. Honestly, the biggest reason I'm in favor of finding a new way besides this to count DLC ratios is not just because I don't like it, but because as the OP said -- this has been discussed to death. It's been made clear on multiple occasions (once or twice even by TA himself, if I remember correctly) that this method won't be used, plain and simple.

Removed Gamer
Gamer has been removed
Posted on 18 February 12 at 00:30
So you and I have the same basic opinion regarding the importance of DLC achievements, correct? Do you have any ideas on how to change things? If we really want to accurately reflect the difficulty of achievements, the current method is clearly insanely flawed. Just take a look at the Ninja Gaiden II achievements. Shoot me a PM if you don't want to start drifting this thread off topic.
Posted on 18 February 12 at 00:46
To set the scene I opted to Include all DLC in my C%. IMO the various options for C% are both correct. Its a matter of opinion whether you want to include DLC or not but both parties can agree on the calculation.

TA Ratio is a different issue. Using the old way the DLC ratios were overstated and incorrect. The new way the DLC ratios are understated and incorrect. "Opting" to view them a particular way doesn't change the fundamental problem that the ratios are very hard for everyone to agree a calculation in the first place.

To me the option of including all gamers who have played the main game in the DLC stats is no different to saying lets include all TA users as having played Avatar because everyone has the option to buy it at the shops.

I would support a discussion on how to calculate the DLC ratios in a better way for everyone but changing the way its viewed individually seems rather pointless to me.
Posted on 18 February 12 at 01:34
I'm just going to toss this in here:

It needs to be a FORMULA. Not some arbitrary setting anyone can change at will. There has to be some sort of formula that calculates the ratio based on SOMETHING. The only idea I've had so far for that something is the base game ratio, but that doesn't compensate for DLCs being easier than the base game (like Gears 3 and Mercury Hg). Maybe some sort of crazy piecewise function based on number of DLC owners would work. But even that wouldn't fix something like Arkham City.
Posted on 18 February 12 at 06:24, Edited on 18 February 12 at 06:30 by KMetalmind
Personally the real problem is that you can´t know which people has the DLC but still hasn´t gotten any achievement from it. All TA ratios are calculated based on how many people own the game, and you can know if somebody doesn´t have any achievements because Live registers it as a game with 0 achievement points, but you can´t do that with DLC. That means games with only hard achievements in DLC or just one hard achievement have low ratios, and I think that´s the only problem in how it works now.

Sorry, but if I bought a game like Ticket to Ride for 800 MSP, without knowing there would be more DLC, got 100% on it and after that there´s DLC for a stupid price like 1000 MSP, I don´t want that to count as being hard, it´s just pricy and I´m not going to pay for it or think I haven´t got 100% on it because that. I bought a game and I completed everything on it. That´s a fact.

If I haven´t bought the DLC, it´s exactly like if it´s a different game. If a hard shmup game only sells 100 units to ultra shmup fans, and 40 of them complete it, the ratio will be lower than some easier games which everybody buys but there´s some hard achievements on it. That´s how it works for full games and I don´t think that will change. DLC for me is like a full different game, as you have to pay to gain access for it.

So if again only 100 people buy it, it should count over those 100 people. Nowadays many companies are getting greedier and it´s common to have pricey DLCs with achievements on it. And many times, those achievements are actually easy. So I don´t feel like people who buy that content should get better TA ratios for that. And I´m telling that knowing I would be benefited for that change, as I have some rare DLC content like Yosumin or Duke Nukem Forever which would get crazy ratios...

If there´s a way in the future to know how many people has the DLC VS how many people has 1 achievement for it, I´m all in the change of the current DLC TA ratio calculation. But for me, counting all people who has the game but not the DLC, would be like counting in full games ratio the players who hasn´t played the game. That would also reflect the rarity, wouldn´t it? Again, if there was a way to count every person who has the game VS only TA people who has the game, I would love the change, but that isn´t happening soon though.

Edit: With that said, if the stat could change based on your settings, I agree with the change. What I wouldn´t want is people which prefers the "DLC I own setting" or "no DLC setting" getting the change. If you prefer to count 100% games when you have all DLC and you want to see TA ratios reflect that, then I agree.

And those stats shouldn´t need to be storaged IMO, you already have # of people who has the game and # of people who has the achievement, so it would just need to be calculated on the fly. I don´t see the problem, although I don´t know how TA has been constructed.
La vida es una búsqueda constante hacia algo mejor
Dr HErB Gudaria
Dr HErB Gudaria
Posted on 18 February 12 at 07:36
alklein92201 said:
@Dr Herb -- This is directly from the TA page about why he started it

We believe the harder an achievement is to obtain, the more points should be received.
Ratio isn't simply about rarity. It's about how difficult it is to obtain. If I haven't bought a DLC yet, does that mean it's hard for me to get that achievement? Not at all, it means I haven't even tried.

I don't need that quote to know what Rich was trying to do with this site, I've been in here almost from day 1 and used it every day since then. I've seen it evolve though these years.

And ratio isn't simply about difficulty, it's about how rare or uncommon an achievement is based on how many people have it comparing with how many people could have it. And as I said before, difficulty can be a factor as many others. Once you have a game in your gamertag is your decission to play or not a DLC, and if you decide not to play it (even if it is for money), it should affect the ratio the same way that it does in other "basic" achievements.

Its curious that you say that calling an acheivement rare is simpler that calling it difficult. When the rarity can come from the difficulty and many other factors, so rarity is more complex, not simpler.

It's obvious that you are very pissed with this that you need to go and write a blog about it. This site can change again the way it calculates the things because the owner is always looking for a way to improve it, I'm only giving some reasons and looking to see if people agrees with me, is just discussing about something that we all like. And yes, we are giving a new option that has never been stated. To count the DLC this way only for those who have the all DLC option on, not to count it for everyone. Stats are already inaccurate when he have 3 different ways to calculate it depending on how we want them.

If there are problems calculating it, I think that the option of excluding DLC should dissappear as this is the most inaccurate of all and makes no sense at all. It gets already covered with the "only DLC I own" option and if someone uses the no DLC option and has a DLC achievement, it does not count for the % even if it is an achievement you have on the tag. For me, this option is completely broken and unnecessary.

And stop saying that we want to boost our stats because that's not the case, even if I'll get a lower overall TA RAtio I'll agree with a change in the DLC policy. If I want to boost my stats I'll start from using the other options, and I won't.
Posted on 18 February 12 at 10:25
I like the uniformity of current approach. It has some drawbacks but it's pretty much as good as it gets, I think.

From a technical point of view, completion calculation and ratio calculation are totally different, as far as I can see: completion calculated on the fly, ratio in a daily iteration (heavy load on server?). So this discussion is nice and all, but in the end it might not be feasible for Rich to implement yet another ratio calculation loop...
Posted on 18 February 12 at 11:07
This is an interesting discussion that has been going on for a long time and I really doubt it will ever be solved to everyones satisfaction. We all have different motives with gaming and unless there are options to suit every perspective there will always be someone who isn't happy.

I like my ratio and my completeion %, so I begrudingly buy the dlc so I can keep my % up, quite often at the expense of my ratio, which sometimes does seem a bit unfair.

Personally, I don't consider DLC part of the main game, in my eyes 1000G is 100%, 1250G is 125% etc, etc, although is not the way that MS or many others consider it, it's just my POV.

The DLC ratios are undervalued on some games, I found the Mirror Edge DLC fairly tricky to complete and yet the ratio is relatively low in comparrison.

Personally it would be great if the DLC did have a higher ratio, but thats just my opinion and as I am into ratio anything that bumps it up would be a bonus to me, but I can see this annoying a great deal of gamers as the majority would see their ratios drop.

It was good to see all the feedback and subsequent improvements that came back from the recent modifications to the gaming session element of TA, maybe that is one route to consider alongside a poll.

As SnelleSjonnie points out, it ulitmately comes down to how do-able it is when all the variations that will un-doubtedly be needed are taken into account.
Want to join in the discussion? Please log in or Register For Free to comment.