The problem is not with the contribution values, but with the GROUP GIVEAWAYS !!!
People keep their "good" games for the groups, that's why is there so much bundle game flood, all the time. And this causes those "low quality giveaways" ... I don't mind if I cant enter a 1000$ giveaway, but it's so rare too soo those, 'cause everybody keeps those games for those "elit" giveaway groups ...
So yeah, KEEP the cv, ofc. But remove the groups ...
Comment has been collapsed.
I sometimes buy and give away games that are on my wishlist and that I really want. Your point?
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks for calling me a leecher! :D :D
That will probably encourage me to give away more non-bundle games in the future. :) Im here only 2 fuckin months and Im a poor student, wtf is wrong with you ...
And yeah, those 2 wins u mentioned, were puzzles or something. Im trying to solve those puzzles and be active in the forums. And what about you? :D :D Ohhh yes, your wins are 99% group wins. Well played! :D
You and those others are the reason why this community is rotting .. You just exchanging games in your groups, and raising your CV, BUUT, its doing nothing for this site, nothing good, in fact, you are making like 10% of your giveaways for the steamgift people? ... Shame ... And the majority of that 10% is bundle games or dlc's. :D WP again. :D
But yeah, this arguing will lead to NOTHING, like in real world, poor people want equality, rich people want to make his rich friends even richer ... Like in real world .. real sad world. :) ^_^
P.S.: Im awaiting your reply, in which you will call me a leecher again, so I can reply: Thank.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't think you're going to be making too many friends on sg
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks for calling me a leecher! :D :D
You're welcome, leecher ;*
That will probably encourage me to give away more non-bundle games in the future. :) Im here only 2 fuckin months and Im a poor student, wtf is wrong with you ...
even if you are a poor student (I'm a poor student myself lol) - you could buy yourself 1-2 beers, 1 pack of cigs or anything of this value less a month and voila! magically you have money for some nice game from sale to give away. you didn't give away nothing other than lowest sale price bundles.
And yeah, those 2 wins u mentioned, were puzzles or something. Im trying to solve those puzzles and be active in the forums. And what about you? :D :D Ohhh yes, your wins are 99% group wins. Well played! :D
Well - what about me? Well - probably nothing - other than a sh*tload of puzzles I made for forums - gave over 40 games this way so far valued over 350$ contri (if you love this foking CV so much) not even including bundles. So the ungrateful *** like you could solve them to get better chance. But this particular one will not anymore, as i guess I'll add him to blacklist for future events.
You and those others are the reason why this community is rotting .. You just exchanging games in your groups, and raising your CV, BUUT, its doing nothing for this site, nothing good, in fact, you are making like 10% of your giveaways for the steamgift people? ... Shame ... And the majority of that 10% is bundle games or dlc's. :D WP again. :D
Yeah! sure! Me giving away games to community, making puzzles, GAs for random people on internet am a reason this community is rotting, unlike such a great leechers who give away nothing but bundle games, cannot enter groups so wish all groups get banned. Do you think that if groups were to be banned all this precious games would go to you? Then think again.
About your argument about me just wanting to raise my CV - sure - that's exactly why I'm so against CV whatsoever talking about it all over the topic and forums. Learn to read/think (cause idk which gives you the problem here).
Ahh and also learn maths! cause since when 97 GAs to SG people (puzzles, publics and events) vs 61 Gas for groups means that 90% of my GAs are Group Giveaways?
And way to talk about bundle games... Remind me again - what's the only thing you're giving away?
But yeah, this arguing will lead to NOTHING, like in real world, poor people want equality, rich people want to make his rich friends even richer ... Like in real world .. real sad world. :) ^_^
You want equality? Move to Cuba or North Korea, cause equality in a way you're talking about is called Communism. All the Western world is long over it.
P.S.: Im awaiting your reply, in which you will call me a leecher again, so I can reply: Thank.
Oh and btw nope - thank you! Way to respect the ones who actually contribute, so a leechers like you could get their precious games.
Comment has been collapsed.
I was too harsh, I have too admit, and I apologize for that. I liked this communtiy for the very first moment, and still like it, you guys didnt make me hate it, dont worry. :) hehe
But I still have to insist to my opinion about group giveaways, srry, I still dont like them, and think those are just friends giving games to other friends, ignoring the steamgift people ... Srry again.
AND the most important:
I thought, I can share freely my opinions here, and after u insulted me,I just tried to protect myself, but if you guys think its good for a blacklist or what is it, then Im good with it, Im not angry with you or something.
It was a good lecture for me related to the forums: If your opinion is differ from the opinion of the majority, dont share it, keep it for yourself.
Comment has been collapsed.
Ohhh, and pls pls pls, if you can giveaway 1500 dollars, without thinking how sad will be your future without that money, and how will you pay your health care, and how will you have food on the table for your future family when your parents will be dead, pls PLS pls, dont say you are poor ...
Comment has been collapsed.
Did you know that $1500 CV can be had for as little as $30 nowadays? You don't need to be rich or even middle class to contribute that much. Heck I'm a poor grad student yet I still manage to scrape together like $20 a month to buy games to give away here.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, that's the entire reason for this debate. Some people actually do spend hundreds of dollars to reach high contributor status, but some people just buy the cheapest things possible and get rewarded with exactly the same things.
The cheapest way (not including free things or price mistakes) to get CV was an Amazon bundle that cost $2.50 for $140 of CV. Other than that, the most "infamous" CV boosts were done through Crazy Machines/Shadow Harvest, which was $1 for $20 of CV.
Before the recent inclusion of the Humble Weekly Bundles to the bundle list, you could get $47 CV for $1 for the THQ bundle.
Comment has been collapsed.
You are the reason why "people like him" only make group giveaways, they can't blacklist people like you on public ones.
Comment has been collapsed.
They should just remove Bundle list but keep the exploited one (those games that can be acquired for free), you still spend your money for games you give to others. In order to get to high contribution giveaways people would make more giveaways themselves. High contribution giveaway = more giveaways. If the creator of a giveaway wants to limit the number of entries to people who gave away more then in stead of making 30.1$ or 100$ why not make it 500$ or1000$? It's up to them to choose who can enter their giveaways.
The only thing that bundle list does it's preventing users to create giveaways.
Comment has been collapsed.
If the creator of a giveaway wants to limit the number of entries to people who gave away more then in stead of making 30.1$ or 100$ why not make it 500$ or1000$? It's up to them to choose who can enter their giveaways.
Previously $500 contrib GAs are now $1000, $2000. So yeah, you're right on that point. But, for others, it means that instead of leisurely giving away normal games, they have to partake in those 1:10/20 ratios so that they can keep up with the CV inflation.
See the problem here?
Comment has been collapsed.
That's only true if other people abuse the high ratio deals. If that abuse is prevented then CV inflation occurs at a much more leisurely pace which can be kept up with by regular gifting of normal games, perhaps with a few bundle games sprinkled in for seasoning.
Comment has been collapsed.
I voted to keep it because we never know if we wind up with a crappier system than this one, so better be safe than sorry.
Here's my suggestion as to what you, almighty CG, should do with the contributor system in the future:
(Originally posted here by me, so i sort of quoted with the "".)
"Stupid, all stupid!
That would just give more of a reason for exploiters to buy games like crazy machines, give them away with no limitations and profit from a couple of coins in the long run by winning 50€ games, no thanks. Said games should be added to the bundle list for good reasons.
I would support if this CP was something monthly and a special type of giveaway was added to the list, at each new month, the CV would reset to it's original full value, and if you ended up making giveaways in the mddle of the month, obviously you would get CV in return to get instantly used within the same month.
Also CV giveaways should be based on full price of each game at the moment on steam, like giving away skyrim for 40 points/CV. CV would act as a special "currency" in this website, not entirelly necessary to win things but it would help. And to make things even more legit, CV giveaways should be up to half the CV value in your profile (eg: if you have 300€ CV, you can make CV giveaways per month up to a value of 150€).
tl;dr
Make a 4th option for contributor value only giveaways, said giveaways would work with monthly limitations and a new currency (1/2 of your CV can be used to make giveaways each month, full CV is used to enter said giveaways [reset each month, eg: 40€ skyrim would deduct 40€ from your total CV at the time]). And most importantly, remove the current CV option from all giveaways, except these new ones. Basically: Public, Group, Private, Contributor."
Comment has been collapsed.
Contributior value is not the source of problem, the people who are trying to abuse/exploit the system causes the problem. why would you want to remove that system ? it should be remain unless it's getting replaced with an improved system..
I bet those who voted for remove are either failed to exploit the system, or tried to leech with 0 cont value and mad about it because they won nothing in those public giveaways with 120345378203 entries.
Comment has been collapsed.
so u r happy because u exploited it :P
as u r saying that : "I bet those who voted for remove are either failed to exploit the system"
Comment has been collapsed.
I think contributor system should be kept. There always will be people who try to exploit things, if not there, then on other websites. All you can do is prevent exploits.
The system can be improved though. Nothing is perfect. It's not bad as it is now, but there's still room for improvement.
Comment has been collapsed.
If you think that there are problems with the people lurking on the site or exploiting the system with bundle giveaways the solution is simple. Put all your giveaways with at least 50/75$ CV or more if you can. Never put public giveaways except the first one. Then the lurkers will try to create more giveaways which is better for the site. Seems easy right?
Comment has been collapsed.
If you are going to keep it, put a cap on how high you can set contributor amount.
It's stupid seeing these $1000+ (up to $5k) giveaways that only 5 or so people can enter. If you wanted to make it so exclusive, make a private giveaway and invite your little club.
Sure, if you want your game to go to someone who may be a little more deserving, set a contributor value. Anything north of $500 (reasonable amount?) is starting to get stupid, though.
Comment has been collapsed.
sure... and someone finds another exploit and gets to your cap for 10$. Or for free. Raising Contrib requirements in GAs are forced for all dem unfair contri boosters. capping contri will just make them win - "yeah, I've spent nothing and I can enter every GA on SG". Plus soon everyone clever enough to use some king of system will be capped. So why do we need contri system exactly?
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm not sure if you've even really looked at those giveaways with over $500 contribution, but there are far more than 5 people who enter LOL
Comment has been collapsed.
It's a great , i don't want any leechers in my giveaways so i can use contributor system to reduce it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well Contributor system is not great , but at least i can giveaway games to giveawayers not lecchers , even if they are exploiters.
Comment has been collapsed.
Definately needs changes. I'd change so number of wishlistings (positively) and number of open giveaways (negatively) affect given value.
Also Group/private giveaways should not give contributor value at all for public giveaways (Edit: As in maybe separeted?). Maybe remove groups giveaways totally (Edit: as in from contributor value).
Comment has been collapsed.
And your reasoning for removing Group GAs is? Except for the reason "I'm not in any group, but I want all dem gamez!" - If I buy game with my own money it's up to me who to give it to. While I'm totally for removing contri from such GAs (I vote for removing contri totally), prohibiting group GAs is just plain stupid and purely based on jelly.
Oh - and if you want to keep CV, but remove it from Priv GAs - why does puzzle makers who often spend hours to make a good puzzle not be rewarded for awesome GA they're making?
Comment has been collapsed.
I think that contributor should be kept, but maybe some little change is needed. My idea is to remove thing such as bundle games. The famous '*' apply only to games that were available for free at high amounts. Games from HIB or Indie gala or whatever else should count for CV only once, I mean if you give away two copies of Darksiders you will only get 20$ CV. That's my opinion in this topic.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'd like to see positive feedbacks rather than contributor value in dollars because even though some people give away bundle games it's still a gift that might make someone happy :). And also people who get gifts from stores get hassled by the bundle games restriction because a lot of games ended up in some bundle or another and a lot of games will end up in a bundle eventually.
So contributor giveaway based on number of feedbacks rather than dollars is better in my opinion.
Comment has been collapsed.
Every system does have flaws but some are more flawed than others. It should be clear that a system that would only count total games given away would fail at its intended purpose much more readily than the current system (which I agree has flaws too).
Comment has been collapsed.
Games like Saints row 3 and Darksiders 2 ended up as bundle games so people who give them away as storebought steamgifts get nothing even though the price of those games in stores isn't all that low.
And i know it's because THQ went bankrupt that those games ended up in bundles but every game ends up in a bundle eventually so the restrictions are more of a hassle with each game that gets marked. Also buying games in sales bothers noone and bundles aren't free, it's just a superhardcore deal, so what's the big difference in buying zeno clash for 1 buck and getting 10 dollars contributor value and giving away bundle games?
And before someone freaks out, i don't give away spare bundle keys but i already got hassled with the restriction rule when i didn't get any contributor value on storebought toki tori gift.
Comment has been collapsed.
Every game does not eventually end up in a bundle. I have every bundle game that has ever been available and that PLUS all of the non-bundle games I have (which are quite a few) does not even total 1/4 of the total on Steam. Meanwhile the total games on Steam continues to rise AT LEAST as fast as the total number of bundled games rises.
Comment has been collapsed.
person A gives away 10 bad rats, he pays 10$ (or even less) and has 10 feedback.
person B gives away 3 games everydoby's excited for: TR, BS:I and RE6. He buys them all in preorders, pays 170$ and gets 3 feedback.
See a problem here? Such a system is in Gala and look into gala - 99% games are cheap bundle leftovers ppl gve away just to boost their feedback, because game worth nothing gives same points as great brand new AAA title - so wy give the second while with the same money ypu could get 60 feedback?
Comment has been collapsed.
Person A then decides to give Darksiders 2 bought from a store and gets no contributor value because
Person B marked the game as a bundle game.
Comment has been collapsed.
That system was designed in all of 30 seconds, and is not intended to be a fully fleshed-out replacement. It's a quick illustration of an alternative.
Why do we need an alternative? Maybe because the current system has enough issues that this thread was created. So how about you make some constructive comments rather than discard any potential change out of hand?
Comment has been collapsed.
He made a constructive comment. I suggest you do likewise. Formulate something that IS more fleshed out, or at least can clearly be seen as a good idea worthy of polishing. You are right that we need some new ideas to improve the current system, but the "count how many total giveaways someone has made" idea leads nowhere.
Best case scenario, further tweaking of it will result in something that for all intents and purposes mirrors the current system but replaces dollar value with point value.
Comment has been collapsed.
Just saying that every system,no matter how you change it,will leave others unsatisfied that wanted to keep the system,cause it didnt became like they wanted it. Also many suggestions are just a "Here is a system that would benefit ME most" (not yours,I am well aware that yours was just quickly drawn). I am just saying that on your system you would have to think on how you value the gifts again,which is basically the same problem we have currently.
Comment has been collapsed.
I voted for it to stay, although I believe it could change for the better. There' lots of good ideas in the forum for that. But I know that I probably wouldn't give away anything at all, or just a few bundle games if it was removed. But I guess there's not much change from now, after all. :(
Comment has been collapsed.
It's not, because those people are gaining CV that they use later to enter public giveaways, and that's not fair.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, since you asked, I can think of one example...
Comment has been collapsed.
Of course they do. And if they didn't then they wouldn't mind to see it removed. So in any case eliminating CV from private and group giveaways is justified.
Comment has been collapsed.
Should make the rule governing Contributor Value something simple and easy to administer. Something such as: any game (regardless of bundling) that goes on sale for less than $4 has its CV suspended for a period of time (say, 6 months after the sale ends). That way it doesn't require any time spent debating "should a game be on the list?" before it gets put on the list. It simply is. And everyone (who has read the FAQ) will know already that such a game will be put on the list.
Comment has been collapsed.
29 Comments - Last post 2 minutes ago by ViToos
53 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by timmyfromspace
40 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by Aerctaure
59 Comments - Last post 4 hours ago by Steamgifty
16,134 Comments - Last post 7 hours ago by seaman
37 Comments - Last post 9 hours ago by JMM72
1,380 Comments - Last post 10 hours ago by Provos
151 Comments - Last post 29 seconds ago by icaio
1,235 Comments - Last post 4 minutes ago by icaio
19 Comments - Last post 13 minutes ago by kctan
38 Comments - Last post 17 minutes ago by HappyCakeday
14 Comments - Last post 18 minutes ago by stogle
22 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by snbac
110 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by SilverSonic
We're working on a number of major updates to the community, and the contributor system is one that we go back and forth on quite a bit. Let's start with a simple poll.
Edit: Currently the results are roughly 66% for keeping the contributor system, and 34% for removing. I looked into the users voting to see if there were any interesting trends. I looked at only votes from contributors, votes from users that have contributed $100+, $1,000+, users that have been registered for more than a year, etc. No interesting data though, they were all similar to the existing results, with roughly 2/3 for keeping it, and 1/3 for removing.
Comment has been collapsed.