Are they really an indication!

At first, I was on a cheivy hunt.. would play a game non stop until I got as close to 1000 as I could... then I got BFBC.. and it all changed... long MP games became the norm for me... played BFBC2 for almost 2 years straight... tried a few games that came
out during that time, Homefront, MOH etc.. but went back to BF games... Does that make me less of a gamer that someone than who bought 100 games during that span.... and only has 100-200 gamer points per game to show for it? I dont think so...

 

I just play a lot of games. It doesn't mean I'm more hardcore than anyone else.

 

I have a feeling that this has to do with my post in the other thread and that it rustled some jimmies since the thread is now locked.

Either way...that was not the intent.

The way I look at it regarding Trophies...is that all the bronze trophies are just the average "finished this level" or "killed 25 ppl with said gun".....stuff that can be done through normal gameplay.

The silver and gold trophies are ones that you have to attempt outside of normal gameplay....most of the time.

Then platnium is just getting all the trophies.

So, in that regard...it's a way to gauge things....but it never was and never is and I never said (just in case) it was the definitive way to label someone as a gamer.

Regarding GS...I would guess if you have a boat ton of points....you either play a lot of games....or really dive into the lesser of games you have....either way you really game a lot.

If you have the amount like me....~10K then it should be relatively easy to see that at the very least....I don't/didn't play my 360 a whole bunch.

Dunno if I just helped or hurt the situation....just my 2 cents.

In any case...I don't care...like I said it's just a way to gauge things....if you don't game at all it's not like I'll hate you. I'm not 12.

 

Only recently have I started going after achievements. However I will never play a game I don't like just to increase my gamerscore. I come from a mainly PC gaming background and only brought the Xbox 360 because my friends got
into gaming and all I would play was Call of Duty and Fifa on the 360, but this generation I expect to spend more time on the Xbox One than the PC.

 

Gamers are gamers are gamers.

Anyone who classifies other gamers as casual, noob, hardcore, etc. is just biased against other gamers. For this reason Dufful, no I do not think achievements are are a measure of any kind of skill, at least on a consistent, measurable scale.

 

So... My thoughts are no... No GS is not any indication.

Point: I have an online gamer friend who's GS is lower than mine (which isn't very impressive I know), but he was the number 1 ranked player in Australia for ME3 multiplayer. He didn't get there and stay there without investing hours upon hours into gaming.
It didn't inflate his GS but pretty much spent as much time climbing the leaderboard and holding the top as others would have spent churning through many, many titles for (possibly) thousands of gamer points.

Also, another scenario, I had/have an offline profile before I started my current profile and as I was a noob, I didn't know how to set up the old one at the time, and decided to set up a new one instead... I have nearly 9000GS on my offline profile... (still
not that impressive, but you get the point)

So my tip... Don't judge... Don't judge people on anything... Life's too short.

 

I do think GS is a way to gauge someone's skill, at least at first. What I mean is, if I see someone with a GS 3x higher than mine, I would figure they are one of 2 things: really, really good, or have A LOT of time to game. Either way, they are probably
going to stomp me in any mp game.

 

Dragon, although your reasoning is sound, the key word in your sentence is "probably."

 

GS means not a lot. I've had to start different acct's at times in order to get in a game due to a higher GS/aggressive rep etc...owned a lot and lost a lot, no matter if the opponents GS was low or Super high...

Regarding trophies and GS...it's easy to see the equivalency on a particular game. If someone has 100% of a particular game then all trophies equivalent. That's bronze, silver, gold platinum. If not then compare a game and achievements completed. Achievements
worth maybe 50-75-100 are like platinum, usually. Sorta like comparing trophies. Either system is no easier than the other to gauge. But GS matters nothing to me.

 

GG, as a rule, I suck at all multiplayer games. So "probably" is probably an understatement.

 

The good news, Dragon, is that it's not about how good or bad you are, but rather about how much fun you have. Anyone who tells you otherwise is wrong.

 

I don't think I've maxed out a single game for the GS, it's an interesting topic tbh. Allot of online gaming does leave your GS stay the same. I never carried over any previous accounts so I didn't pay much attention tbh.

 

I play games for the fun, but sometimes I have chased the cheevos, but gamer score is not an indication of skill in my opinion, the only way you can know how good a player might be is to play with or against them, or watch them playing.

 

I personally don't think it's an indication that your more of a gamer lets say.

My previous GT was not far off 180,000 but my wife, daughter use to play loads on it, also play quite a few of the easy achievement games.

There was games like Fight Night 3, I played this through a few times but that was quite easy to get the 1000g on so a lot depends on what games you play, some are easy achievements, some not so easy.

Obviously there are some that go after the achievements, some just play a game just for the fun, some stick mostly to MP gaming, this all factors into it.

 

I played the heck out of some games and only got maybe 1/4 of the achievements. I never look at the list of achievements for a game because I have no patience to go through them and try to get them. They are truly of zero interest to me.