I'd loved to give it to you via SG, but in this case.. I'm sorry
Comment has been collapsed.
By all means, feel free to ask Ubisoft- or EA, or CDR- to add an AP to their client that's similar to what Steam has, and they can be considered for similar functionality. The main issue right now is one of inability for giveaway sites to automatically connect to games or accounts, not of unwillingness to establish such a framework.
Comment has been collapsed.
While I'd love to enter, making non-steam GAs here is forbidden.
Not to mention the winner of this GA would be screwed over by tools like SGTools because the game wouldn't appear on his Steam library, resulting the winner to be banned from lots of GAs.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well I recently did a forum giveaway where I picked a winner for each game myself... means you don't get CV though
Comment has been collapsed.
Not allowed? Too bad, I really wanted Far Cry 4 :(
Comment has been collapsed.
would be happy with the game and dont own them. Thanks.
Comment has been collapsed.
you can use randomizers like http://wheeldecide.com to pick winners (max 100).
make a thread, ask people interested to write something specific if they want to enter, put their names in the wheel, spin, done.
you could even record or screenshot it. =3
Comment has been collapsed.
As a peasant 3, I feel like this is rigged. Peasant 4 probably knew the giveaway creator.
Comment has been collapsed.
I love Far Cry games. I would be really happy if I win it. Thank you.
Comment has been collapsed.
get a 0.01 cheap key from DIG store and make a giveaway.
The winner gets a bonus key
or after the giveaway ends delete it
Comment has been collapsed.
That can actually be done on SG. As long as the winner gets the Steam game/key promised, anything else is a "bonus."
Comment has been collapsed.
So you can't create a FarCry 4 GA and after the GA ends (and a winner is picked) ask for deletion?
assuming everyone who enters accepts this fact
Comment has been collapsed.
That would fall under the category of "misleading giveaway," and you would be penalized for it. Just give the FC4 key in addition to the normal giveaway.
Comment has been collapsed.
This is actually an awesome idea! I will deffo use this concept for non-steam keys and alike :D Thanks for suggesting it! <3
Comment has been collapsed.
There are several suggestions over the table. If you decide to select someone at random, I would like to participate. I played a lot of Far Cry 3 and liked it.
Comment has been collapsed.
with equal CV value
*Edited for better phrasing:
You can actually significantly increase your CV value if you trade with CV in mind, as people are often willing to offer extra for less easily acquirable games, in reflection of the higher value they have as being such. This could mean a handful of low tier high CV games (well-reviewed, high-interest ones, not just clickteam/gamemaker stuff), or a selection of Humble Monthly games (which, while not bundled enough for bundle listing, may still be discounted far more than the game you're offering). If your game is a high-profile unbundled game, then the comparative purchase value'd likely still be lower than what you paid for your game, but you'd end up with more CV due to the nature of returns from bundle games.
Comment has been collapsed.
I just meant, I've traded higher CV items for things that were unable to be posted to SG due to API glitches, and I've received higher CV for Groupees greenlight keys (due to the scarcity of certain never-rebundled games, they have high trade value- but due to their typical review outcome, they're not usually good for giveaways). My point wasn't a discussion of profit or exploitation, but that you don't have to feel something is worthless just because it can't be put up for giveaway.
There's a certain gain on SG, for putting up something high-value or unbundled, that isn't reflected in the CV it provides. If you trade off a high profile game, you likely should receive a CV profit on that trade, especially given that you're probably still losing out on CV to purchase price compared to other options out there, anyway. The point isn't exploitation, or even cost-efficency- it's about being able to feel good about your trades and giveaways. As to what that entails, it's different per person, so I felt it worth mentioning.
Another similar example is a free game- it used to be, you could trade those to people for CV-able games, if the free game was high enough interest. That presumably is still true, even though they can now be given away- but before that, it was a good example of the "even though it can't be posted, doesn't mean it can't work out favorably for all involved".
I'm not recommending maximizing CV, or utilizing CV-exploitative games in giveaways. I just like the idea of everyone- gifter, trader, and winner- getting to feel positive about their involvement at the end of the process, and being able to feel that they got a fair outcome.
In review, my original phrasing may have poorly reflected the nature of my sentiments- I apologize for that. I've edited it for better clarity, hopefully it's less misleading on intent now.
Comment has been collapsed.
No need to apologize. In fact, my apologies, for using such a harsh word as "exploit". You're right, of course, trading offers many possibilities for both parties to come out better. My initial idea simply was, that if OP had been okay with the CV from the Uplay game, there's no need to squeeze out more. Thanks for your detailed explanation.
Comment has been collapsed.
Trades should not be posted or organized on the site.
Comment has been collapsed.
Right... And you'll also go and remind all those begging for the key about the rules too I trust?
Or the guy literally 4 posts below me offering a trade as well? At least be consistent.
Comment has been collapsed.
I ain't no snitch. Except when cornered.
Seriously though, it just seems pretty random that you cruised by on your super moderator beat and picked up on my proposal to the OP, especially when the wording on my transgression is that one 'should not' post trades, where as it says 'do not' beg. Technically speaking, 'should not' implies it's generally not acceptable, but may still be allowed in some cases. Whereas 'do not' means never. Like one might say 'you should not brush your teeth with Jack daniels', that doesn't mean you can't do it, just that it's not a good idea. In this case I took it that the rule was there because steamtrades exists. I figured if ever there was a reason to offer a trade here it would be so someone can turn something useless on this site into a giveaway for everyone. So it didn't seem like a trade in the normal sense. Apparently I was wrong.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks for explaining. So it's the rat amongst us who was been inconsistent then.
But do consider changing the wording on that rule if it's never allowed under any circumstances. Make it "Do not post trades", then it's crystal clear.
Comment has been collapsed.
9 Comments - Last post 9 minutes ago by chillplay
141 Comments - Last post 23 minutes ago by Adamdoodles
1,388 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by Delisper
880 Comments - Last post 7 hours ago by sensualshakti
15,575 Comments - Last post 8 hours ago by devotee
44 Comments - Last post 8 hours ago by adveniat
563 Comments - Last post 10 hours ago by XxSeRyIxX
4 Comments - Last post 15 minutes ago by hyrokey
68 Comments - Last post 29 minutes ago by vinirockman
9 Comments - Last post 33 minutes ago by hsunkuei
166 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by callmeBG
26,774 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Prevost
88 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by Delisper
1,183 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by icaio
I bought a UPlay- Key by mistake, so I've decided, that you'll get it.
It's not a Steam Key!
deleted
Please Enter only if you don't
*Don't own any Far Cry 4 Version
good luck and have much fun =)
Comment has been collapsed.