Steam leaderboards and ranks explained

I see a lot of people having hard time understanding steam ladder and ranks and why it is so hard for relic to implement in-game 'true ranks' and ladder. Why are they trying so hard to have ladders on 3rd party sites? Why does everyone have rank 100?

Well the answer is quite simple: Competitive play and competitiveness have evolved, its that simple.

Relic is just caught between rock and a hard place with this one.
People keep saying 'games had these features 10 years ago' and so on...

The hard cold truth is: 10 years ago 'Soccer mum kids' were just kids, now they grew up and they are playing COH2 (and other games).

If you need explanation of 'Soccer mum kids' generation here it is:

-Its the generation of kids that has been indoctrinated by their parents, schools, books, TV, etc that being competitive means:
-Participating in competitive team or single sport event = wining
-Everybody gets the medal at the end of the day, who was better and won is not important at all
-Everybody is just as good as anyone else and winner doesn't get 'winners medal' they get the same medal as everyone else
-Every kid is just as good as any other kid in everything and anything, and any suggestion otherwise is highly politically-incorrect and it is abomination (an action that is vicious, vile, etc.)
-Average 15 year old kid has more trophies, medals, photos of them receiving medals and awards without actually wining anything, than Messi and Ronaldo together (Famous Football players (Soccer players)

In the end you got yourself clash of cultures and generations.

For some being ranked 10897 means they have to practice and try harder to do better...

For others it would be an act of abomination, telling them they are not as good as anyone else.
Displaying true ranks would mean that a lot of people would need counseling and a lot of presents to cheer them up after seeing the horrifying thing on their screen.

Hence there are 3000 achievements and reaching highest rank is just as easy if you are really good or really bad.
Its just evolution of competitiveness. Don't blame Relic, blame 'Soccer mums' and political correctness

Clearly the ladders and boards are broken and should be fully implemented, but I'm not sure it was designed to be so terrible or be on a third party site because of soccer mums.

Clearly the ladders and boards are broken and should be fully implemented, but I'm not sure it was designed to be so terrible or be on a third party site because of soccer mums.

hahaha

Lol wtf. Soccer mum kids only exist in america otherwise i would heard of them. I can be totally categorized as soccer mum kid by your description but believe me im totally not. I like that the best one gets the biggest medal. Lolololol

Clearly the ladders and boards are broken and should be fully implemented, but I'm not sure it was designed to be so terrible or be on a third party site because of soccer mums.

This is so funny hahahaha

Nah, you got 2 kinds of players:

- The real competitive player or true cohfan, when his rank is not nr1, he will not rest until he reaches to top.

- The casual player; you know the guy who plays fifa, battlefield, skyrim, halo, gta ...
For the casual player the game needs to stay fun, that's why you get levels and rewards and shit. The casual player is also more likely to buy extra campaigns etc. If the casual player loses too much he'd just go to another game.

....and we need both.

A lot of people think games can't please both sides of the coin when, in fact, it can. Problems begin when you design the game around one of them and expect BOTH to like it.

Just thik about the psvita, it failed because it is oriented to hardcore players, instead of being a consola playable by casual gamers too, anyway Thanks soccer moms.

Well the answer is quite simple: Competitive play and competitiveness have evolved, its that simple.

The true reason these ranks and bulletins exist in CoH2 and other games (for example: unlocking weapons and prestiging in FPS games) is the guaranteed reward a casual player gets when playing the game. This reward is not entirely seperate from performance, as the time invested in playing the game increases the chance of gaining a reward earlier on. Nevertheless, the reward can be obtained independent of the skill level of the respective player. This increases the attractiveness to play the game.

There is no clash of cultures and generations, rather than good marketing strategies. The "soccer mom kid" generation that is described here is merely an American phenomena and does not exist, to the same extend, in Europe.

The "soccer mom kid" generation that is described here is merely an American phenomena and does not exist, to the same extend, in Europe.

It does here atleast in Finland.

Lol wtf. Soccer mum kids only exist in america otherwise i would heard of them. I can be totally categorized as soccer mum kid by your description but believe me im totally not. I like that the best one gets the biggest medal. Lolololol

The best one doesn't get the biggest medal. The best one wins the medal, medals are only for winners. That is exactly the difference I was trying to explain

I am not saying either way is right way or wrong way, but If you give me a medal for participating it would be like an insult. Just the way I grew up

It does here atleast in Finland.

That is because the non-competitive environment for children described in the OP has been the standard in Europe, including Finland, for decades. Therefore, this generation cannot be classified as the "soccer mom kid" generation and lacks correlation with the observed game changes in the last 10 years.

That is because the non-competitive environment for children described in the OP has been the standard in Europe, including Finland, for decades. Therefore, this generation cannot be classified as the "soccer mom kid" generation and lacks correlation with the observed game changes in the last 10 years.

What. No. Completely wrong and backwards.

It means kids are extremely competitive here, as urged on by their career building mothers who demand more and more success and achievement from their children.

The true reason these ranks and bulletins exist in CoH2 and other games (for example: unlocking weapons and prestiging in FPS games) is the guaranteed reward a casual player gets when playing the game. This reward is not entirely seperate from performance, as the time invested in playing the game increases the chance of gaining a reward earlier on. Nevertheless, the reward can be obtained independent of the skill level of the respective player. This increases the attractiveness to play the game.

There is no clash of cultures and generations, rather than good marketing strategies. The "soccer mom kid" generation that is described here is merely an American phenomena and does not exist, to the same extend, in Europe.

You just described what 'soccer mum kid generations' is. Needs rewards and motivation to play. Wining and unlocking stuff, regardless of how well you play or not. And if you cannot win, you can buy it...

This concept is absolutely wrong for someone who is not that generation, because you want to play vs someone with exactly the same units and capabilities. To win thanks to your skill, not something you unlocked and gives you advantage. However small it might be.

Maybe 'soccer mum kid' is American expression but none the less, its a developed world phenomenon. So unless you are living in poverty, and you are 18 year old, you are one.

I work in Marketing industry, so I know very well how marketing works.

You make steam as it is, to make happy all the casual players (majority) who love their rank 100 and achievements and you tell the rest that you are working on fixing it. Then you fix it when majority is the ones that want competitive ranks.

What. No. Completely wrong and backwards.

It means kids are extremely competitive here, as urged on by their career building mothers who demand more and more success and achievement from their children.

Then why did you state that the "soccer mom kid" does exist in Finland...?

What. No. Completely wrong and backwards.

It means kids are extremely competitive here, as urged on by their career building mothers who demand more and more success and achievement from their children.

What Nullist said, neither is wrong way. Just the way things are perceived, like medals and concept of winner/loser

Then why did you state that the "soccer mom kid" does exist in Finland...?

Because you stated they dont exist in Europe?

Then why did you state that the "soccer mom kid" does exist in Finland...?

You see 'soccer mum kid' concept as bad thing, that is where your confusion comes from

Its not a bad thing, just different to what competitiveness meant before

You just described what 'soccer mum kid generations' is. Needs rewards and motivation to play. Wining and unlocking stuff, regardless of how well you play or not. And if you cannot win, you can buy it...

This concept is absolutely wrong for someone who is not that generation, because you want to play vs someone with exactly the same units and capabilities. To win thanks to your skill, not something you unlocked and gives you advantage. However small it might be.

What you have labelled as a "generation" has been common in Europe for decades and thus many generations. Obviously, these changes towards the European standard are visible in the United States.

The concept is neither wrong or right as it is intended for marketing purposes and game developers merely adapt to these (cultural) changes for all the known reasons. Besides that, a guaranteed reward system does not prevent a competitive scene to evolve.

Because you stated they dont exist in Europe?

...which you confirmed by stating kids in Finland are very competitive...

Nullist, I know I will regret this, but......you misinterpreted the concept of "soccer mom kids" for kids that are being pushed to competitiveness, where it actually means the opposite.