I think it's good to keep. It's a good prize for all the good people that give away games, to create giveaway for the people that give away some games...
The only change for me, it's the ammount of the contributor... No decimals, only integer value. Or/And the contributor giveaway with only multiple of 5 value. ($5, $10, $15, $20 and so on).
Sorry for my bad english.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, or people should just use non-rounded up values
Comment has been collapsed.
At that level of CV I don't think the one cent makes much difference. However that still illustrates the problem - say you weren't using rounded values for a GA you wanted to be for ~$20 contributors. So you set the bar at 19.99. However Player 1 gave away two games each valued at 9.99, and therefore is at 19.98. You anticipate this for your next GA and set the bar at 19.98, but Player 2 gave four $4.99 games - still arguably pretty much $20, but short of the non-rounded value. There is just too much variance in the system to rely on people doing it manually
Comment has been collapsed.
we should keep contributor value its makes me want to make more giveaways of good games
Comment has been collapsed.
I think you should keep it. Most enter here waiting for getting games without any progress,thinking that this is some kind of a infinite birthday. With the CV, you make that people to realise that in order to get those games, they must give other ones, making them be part of SG.
And yes,I can't be the one saying these things... I would love to give a game everytime i have enough money, but i don't have the money to do it. But, if I had it, i'm sure as hell that i would create a giveaway in this page every week.
Comment has been collapsed.
I wonder what people with high CV voted vs those with low CV or no CV at all.
Comment has been collapsed.
But then I'd have to read. Obviously you don't know how damn lazy I am.
But anyway yeah I guess I should have. Didn't realize cg had updated the OP though, so my bad.
Comment has been collapsed.
I voted to remove it, too^^
It has its good sides, but it causes too much trouble with devgiveawayleecher, exploiter of bundlekeys and so on trying to sneak into high contribution. Giving is about love, makeing people happy with a cool game, haveing fun with people in chats, events, maybe together in coop-games(I am not that much into it), and not about careing about your value...serious...
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes I agree with everything you said, which is why I voted to remove too.
Comment has been collapsed.
What's wrong with private giveaways? All of my private giveaways are open to the public.
Comment has been collapsed.
Nothing against high contributors, I was just saying most of you guys use steamgifts in a way thats unrelated to contributor values, its mostly private giveaways (private, open or puzzle) and group giveaways. Most of the people who replied to GoJays post (and GoJay himself) have over $1000 contributions and practically no contributor giveaways.
Sorry my post does come off a bit aggressive against you guys when I dont feel that way.
Comment has been collapsed.
Without contributor value you would still be doing the same giveaways though, the existence of CV doesnt affect you either way. CV is the lazy way of filtering applicants, and yes it has its abusers, but thanks to those people abusing CV we have many more giveaways than before.
Comment has been collapsed.
I already posted this in another topic before I realized it's more fitting to put it here:
maybe change it so that if your bundle games represent less than 30% of your non-bundle value you get 100% of its retail value and only 10% for value that goes over that.
In more mathematical terms: you gave away
X non bundle games
Y bundle games
your contributor value is than
if Y<0.3X: X+Y,
if Y>0.3X: X+0.3X+(Y-0.3X)*0.1]
Comment has been collapsed.
The problem is in defining what is a bundle game. Things used to be simple back then. Now there's gala store, Amazon bundle and latest: the humble weekly sale.
Comment has been collapsed.
Solution: all 1$ bundles (so not just 1$ games only if theres a couple in 1 bundle for just 1$) will be counted as a bundle. Older giveaways from shadow ops or crazy machines will still count as non-bundle giveaways but new ones not (so no one gets upset).
Comment has been collapsed.
I've voted for remove it, but all in all I don't dislike it so much... I just think it doesn't fit with the current implementation / situation around... just look at how many games and bundles go on sale every day... it's very easy to farm contributor points and create a pointless system that discourage new user to donate freely (I've bought many games to give away but I'm feeling a bit oppressed by that). Just try another way to reward people that keep contributing a lot to the community, but please avoid the current system that is pointless and keep damaging the spirit of the site.
Comment has been collapsed.
So you gave a DS II key away and during the same time did a give of RF:Armageddon, RF:Guerilla and Darksiders?
Yeah, right. Great coincidence with the Humble Weekly, which had exactly the same games. You don't need to be a fisherman to know something's fishy here.
Comment has been collapsed.
Proofs nothing. I could sent you several screens of buying RF:G and RF:A,yet I still could have given away a bundle key. If you bought the key fromg gmg and gave it away while keeping the bundle key for yourself it doesnt change much,the game was bundled at the point you gave it away,if you bought it more expensive it's your decision.
Comment has been collapsed.
Feel free to express your opinion and what changes you would like to see made :)
Comment has been collapsed.
I was mostly pointing out the inaccuracy of the poll itself. It's really no surprise to me at all that so many are in favor of keeping some kind of contribution system. I don't really have the time or knowledge of the intricacies of the system to post a very well informed opinion on the matter - so rather than post a poorly informed opinion I decide to remain quiet. I think the real issue with a poll like this is that it's results are largely misleading.
Comment has been collapsed.
Ugh, so much to read...
My worry is that without the contributor status, people are going to mostly break into private groups even more than they do now.
On the flip, giving away games generously shouldn't be about the return.
People can still make others work for their giveaways via puzzles (I say that reluctantly considering I can barely ever figure out most of the nonsensical, ridiculous "puzzles/quizes" people put out there).
Comment has been collapsed.
One suggestion I do have is that if someone can somehow prove that they purchased a non-bundle version of a game, they should be able to get full credit for it. If it requires a timestamped photo of yourself posing next to a screen, so be it, but it would be fair. And it shouldn't be too time consuming to respond to the requests. It's just a major bummer when you have a key you're considering giving away and then it becomes bundled. That happened to me with the unexpected THQ bundle, and while I got rid of my Darksiders and Red Faction keys before they officially became bundled, I've heard others lamenting the same issue. I think it would be a good solution, and it shouldn't be too time consuming to be viable either.
Comment has been collapsed.
The system should be IMPROVED, not removed.
But it's easier to just remove something than change it for the better, isn't it?
Comment has been collapsed.
Look at the forums. There have been thousands of ideas already posted. Admins and mods don't seem to even consider them. They just want to take the easy way out - either remove all of this and the problem will "go away" or leave it as it is. They don't even ask about ideas. They don't care about them. They gave us a choice. Leave it or remove it. Simple as that.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't think you're being fair. The title of the thread is "What do you think of the SG contributor system?", and then there is "a simple poll."
That (at least to me) doesn't mean they don't care about ideas.
Now, I haven't read this thread completely; but most of what I see is people wanting the system to be improved, as you said yourself, and not giving any input on how to improve it. Naming specific games / bundles / discounts that people feel should or should not be included is hardly helping. As I have said before, manually updating all games with the cheapest price they have ever been anywhere really isn't an option.
Comment has been collapsed.
There are hundreds of ideas already. Mine won't make any difference. I'll suggest something if they'll create thread called "Suggest how we can improve CV system". Then it'd make sense. In this one they just want to see the results of the poll.
Comment has been collapsed.
The way you think is both arrogant and flawed. I probably spent more time thinking about different systems and solution;i talked often about it with Shobo and some mods and with other users and yet I downvoted? Easy way out? Certainly not. Removing is a solution. "Improving" is very subjective. We have like 10 different "improvement solutions" atm (and everyone of them have different ways,too). You think a "Remove bundle category" guy will be pleased with a "no contributor for bundled games"?(just as an example). Yet both sides vote YES. The system might get changed, not improved. Some might see it as improvement,many others will disagree or continue to not care that much. Speaking about caring...why am I for removing? Quoting wbarton: "Stop wasting your time and money worrying about your value. If you think it's a good investment, you're an idiot." So yeah,you might piss off those guy caring about CV,but I seriously don't care if they are pissed,thats why I downvoted the system.
Now give me your smart and hard answer,for I take the easy and dumb solution.
Comment has been collapsed.
We're pretty arrogant, aren't we...?
Semantics. Let's not improve it then but let's just change it. Some people will always be unhappy. You can not and you even shouldn't attempt to please everyone. You know why? Because not only you will not succeed but you'll also go crazy or it'll give you a huge headach while trying to do that. Admins and mods run this site and I trust their better judgment. If they will remove it then I will not be pleased. You know why? Because I'm not going to make giveaways of good games for leechers who give nothing in return. And I don't mean people who have no money to give games away. I mean leechers. And there's plenty of those. Those who can give away but don't want to and who would rather just leech. Having a CV which limis people who can enter is very good because you can set rules as to which people can enter and which can not. But I agree it's flawed because it's easy to get a lot of CV with paying very little money. That's why it has to be changed, not removed.
Comment has been collapsed.
I totally support the idea of the CV and even when I do accept that I did give away for example "the ship" that was free for me. But I still did gave games I do actually payed for. It's allright with me and my reduced CV. I do accept I'm more a leecher rather than a gifter and even I would love to enter to every single giveaway I like. Even when sometimes I just ask to the gods why the hell that AAA game has a CV value above mine, I still realise and do accept that the gifter decided that I'm not included in his giveaway.
I do hate groups, maybe because I'm not that social and that sincereley I don't have the time to play with others rather than my friends or just because I don't have the money to buy games for that actual group. Most of the groups here don't agree with the spirit of the site. If you just want to give games away to your little group. Then make it outside of SG and with out the benefits they gave that in this case is the CV. Whats the point of a group of 20 or 30 just gifting games to each other. They just boost there CV but I don't know if they do actually make any use of those high CV since if they are constantly gifting games then maybe they don't need to enter publick giveaways since they don't need charity if you want to call it in a way. Still I do find that most of the groups seem to be unfair and not sharing the same spirit in wich SG was created (I speak as if I was here since the beginning when I'm relatively new here, but I do think that what I'm saying here is true).
We all do know that there is a lot of people that are just pumping their own CV by regifting games in their own of people and that we all know that's forbidden. This is one of the points of why some people want the CV removed and sometimes it makes me want the CV to be removed but then not everyone is like this.
I placed my vote on Keeping the system and even when I cannot provide a suggestion I think that maybe it can be modified a bit to make it better. Because CV is the reason of why many people, and I'm included here, want to give games away. I do it to have better odds and that's it. Hate me if you want but I'm being sincere here and someone needs to be like this.
If you see any mistake please take in mind I did my best knowing that English is not my first language.
Comment has been collapsed.
Voted for remove because I wanted to be a contrarian.
Comment has been collapsed.
Keep contributor value, but make every game that ever appeared in 'pay what you want' bundle 1 point, like SG already does with Humble Bundles. That would remove any incentive to cheat system. Also, any attempts to exploit by giving several bundle codes as 'collection' or 'pack' when the codes do not add up to whole collection on Steam (say, trying to give Binding of Isaac + WoL code as Isaac pack despite missing all the other stuff it has) should end up with a ban until cheater gives missing items, too (obviously, to prevent mistakes, any pack or bundle pickable on SG could list required contents on confirmation). Two above things would greatly simplify the moderator life, IMHO.
Comment has been collapsed.
I voted to remove it, too^^
It has its good sides, but it causes too much trouble with devgiveawayleecher, exploiter of bundlekeys and so on trying to sneak into high contribution giveaways. Giving is about makeing people happy with a cool game, haveing fun with people in chats, events, maybe together in coop-games(I am not that much into it), and not about careing about your value...serious...
Comment has been collapsed.
Hey, remove it. You'll see how little giveaways with actual good and expensive games there will be. Only creme de la creme groups with 10-30 people will be giving away good games for themselves. SG will become a dump for Bundle Games. Say what you want about CV but it was a great motivator for many people to actually give games away. They got some more digital numbers right next to their avatar and others got awesome games. Remove this and this site will change 180 degress. Don't take my word for it. Just see for yourself.
Comment has been collapsed.
there should be another option that would be "keep the idea but tweak it and make it work" :P
i think that is better to have them than to remove them but they are not an important aspect of the community and they dont solve more problems than it causes.
The concept is good, but it needs to be rethinked to find a real solution
Comment has been collapsed.
31 Comments - Last post 1 minute ago by lext
1,839 Comments - Last post 22 minutes ago by gorok
16,315 Comments - Last post 31 minutes ago by Ale2Passos
38 Comments - Last post 39 minutes ago by Axelflox
104 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by WaxWorm
1,018 Comments - Last post 3 hours ago by sensualshakti
47,109 Comments - Last post 5 hours ago by ManOman
10 Comments - Last post 1 minute ago by akfas
8,006 Comments - Last post 1 minute ago by Skwerm
815 Comments - Last post 8 minutes ago by MayoSlice
30 Comments - Last post 10 minutes ago by Romaki96
9,167 Comments - Last post 14 minutes ago by schmetti
53 Comments - Last post 15 minutes ago by Graved
64 Comments - Last post 15 minutes ago by AllTracTurbo
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.