give trophies a chance people ... its still early to judge it.

Okay, thanks for clearing that up :)

There are more disadvantages to Trophies than advantages.

Although the platinum trophies and leveling system can be a slightly better thing to really compare who is playing better, who is to say that further down the line, trophies wont become another whorefest when developers make them easy or they make another Avatar-like mistake?

As much as people want to argue, the leveling system is far more complicated. This is because its harder to level up once you get to higher levels.

For example, say you are level 25. How many and what type of trophies it takes to level up to 26 is not shown and unknown. And this will change when you get to higher levels, 50 to 51 and so on.

Gamerscore is much easier. Say you have 50,000 G. Getting 5,000 more G is the same whether you have 0 G or 50,000 G or 100,000 G.

To make the problem worst, there are a different number and type of Trophies per game and its not a standard 1,000 G for retail games and 200 G for XBLA games.

And last but not least, Sony is seriously taking their own sweet time on this. I hope theyd at least allow comparison online and show how much each type of trophy is worth for leveling up at different levels.

Sony assigns a game a different value depending on its size, like retail vs. XBLA. The combined value of all the trophies in the game must not exceed this value, so even though you don't know exactly how many trophies you are getting (bronze trophies have lesser value compared to silver and gold), it will be the same value for every PSN game for example, depending on the size of it of course (I doubt Siren: Bloodcurse would have as few trophies as for example PAIN)

If what youre saying is true, then doesnt this make comparing number of trophies moot?

For example, say Siren has 5 Gold, 10 Silver, 10 Bronze and Super Stardust HD now has 2 Gold, 6 Silver and 9 Bronze. If you say that PSN titles have the same value, then isnt the Siren Gold/Silver/Bronze worth less than the SSHD Gold/Silver/Bronze for your leveling up?

Anyway I recommend this website for following PS3 trophies as they have done a good job for 360 Achievements:  http://www.ps3trophies.org

My specific example with Siren is that the game is essentially quite big for a PSN title, and so I think it will be treated like a retail game regarding trophies (if it even gets trophies that is xP)

Thanks for the website btw :)

I think you're focusing too much on the Level thing, which I figured is just some counter for how much time you waste in the end. Also where was it confirmed that "leveling" up get's harder? It's not an RPG game. Even if it does, it certainly wouldn't make comparing trophies worthless anymore than cheesy achievements games like Avatar, which you already mentioned.

I aslo like the concept of not enforcing certain total values on games, unlike achievements. In fact that's one of the problems with achievements in my opinion. You have people in the VGChartz league complain about other people burning through cheese games and coming out on top for the weekly point contests. That's probably why you focus more on certain game contests than the weekly total now. I like the trophies concept since without assigned point values (Just three different metals), it becomes more on who has more trophies/achievements, than how much they're "worth".

For example. Say someone who rents Avatar, King Kong, and CSI and blows through them for 3000G in a week and tops the league that week. Someone else only played The Orange Box and only managed half of it's achievements and averages around 500 points. If you actually counted how many achievements those two people earned, it might paint a different picture. As all three of the before mentioned games have a combined total of 19 achievements and half of the Orange Box would be around 50 achievements.

I don't know what the hell levels that would equate to if they were trophies, but I really wouldn't care, as you can easily compare how many and what kind of trophies people have as evidenced by all these little PS3 Cards people have in their sigs now. For that reason I like that (at the moment) there doesn't seem to be a certain value games have to follow for trophies, as something like the Orange Box should be worth more than three moive/tv liscense games in these werid little scoring systems.

You can of course count and compare achievements, but pretty much everything set-up now for comparing achievements is more focused on how much your score is, or what your completion rate is, than simply how many little accomplishments you've earned.

Again, bummer how incredibly little support this thing may get. But it was introduced over a year later after the PS3 itself, so it truly is an afterthought in that sense.

I know this is off topic but trophies or awards or whatever must be the most useless feature of a gaming console ever devised by man.

I actually like the Trophies system better than gamerscore, but I wouldn't call the system "better" until they get a lot more games to implement them.

Personally, the trophy system beats the shit out of gamerscore... Unlike what twesterm pointed out, sure you have no idea what level 4 means, but the fact that the different trophies are ranked by difficulty is amazing. 5000 gamerscore can me some douche rented 500 games and got a shitload of 10 point achievements, I mean is it really "gamer score" or find the fastest way to milk points..

At least with trophies you get the final reward, or should I say, basically the only one that matters once you get EVERY other trophy the game has to offer. You get that friggin platinum trophy, which when comparing to friends, separates the boys from the men :P (I don't agree with this paragraph at all, I think comparing digital points is well... pointless... I'm just saying to iterate a... point... shit too many points)

But anyway, take it easy on the OP guys :P He was showing a concern, yes a silly one given the situation, but a concern none the less... no need to be ravenous :P