I'm ok with this and i don't care if this affect my contributor value (i don't think i ever gave any bundle keys or such). I mean, you could even set all my contributions to 0$ and i still wouldn't care, i dont make giveaways to show off, my only goal is to make people happy who can't afford games at this point
Comment has been collapsed.
that feel when you made an amnesia giveaway that wasn't from a bundle
Great stuff though.
Comment has been collapsed.
I think this will be a good change. I guess the next "big" problem will be regifters. I've seen quite a lot of them recently.
Comment has been collapsed.
I completely agree. I own a lot of games, buy a lot of bundles, and get a lot of dups. I own those games, and I want to give those games away and make people happy. I could care less about stupid points. Make them 1pt, i dont care. 0pts? sure, just stop the reporting fanatics who love to make generous people feel bad.
Comment has been collapsed.
Looks like I wont be ever again buying another indie game for this site :/ cos theyre all gonna end up in bundles so , no more Indies !
Comment has been collapsed.
Outh, this would halve your contrib value I can see why you'd be upset.
Comment has been collapsed.
It would absolutely destroy contrib value for people who've given away games (even if totally legitly, say like in Steam inventory item form) that just happen to have been in bundles before. Or will be in the future...
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, users who contributed a lot could easily get 20% more value now if they didn't give away games from bundles yet.
Comment has been collapsed.
And the best thing about this update is losing contribution for the game that was in inventory and given away. I don't know in which bundle were The Ship complete pack, but since I've given away a tradeable copy from my inventory I feel that I'm victim to this new policy.
Comment has been collapsed.
Many many comments. Sorry I didn't read all of them before posting. One question: would the person in the last example gradually receive credit for their bundle submissions if they later created giveaways for non-bundle games?
Comment has been collapsed.
No problem with this, but might hinder people from making indie giveaways. Anyway, how about those fake giveaways cheating for contributor status? And should we click the report button in ongoing individual indiegala key giveaway?
Comment has been collapsed.
If they haven't submitted anything else than bundle keys/free games, their contribution amount is reduced to $0.00. Probably no suspensions for them though.
Comment has been collapsed.
Problem not solved. I bought a giftable copy of Limbo on Steam at $2.49, after it had been in a bundle. In fact, of all my giveaways, only one has been a key, one of the copies of Lara Croft: Guardian of Light which as far as I know has never been in a bundle..
Comment has been collapsed.
Problem not solved; problem merely slightly ameliorated.
Comment has been collapsed.
Okay, fair enough. I was talking about the broader problems of games becoming "tainted" by ever being in a bundle.
Comment has been collapsed.
Hence my proposal to put a time limit on the lower value. Keep the game as a "bundle game" for 3-6 months then restore it's full status. Yes, there will be a window in which a giftable copy will still count as a bundle key, but it minimizes the problem even more.
Comment has been collapsed.
a) Calm down.
b) Why not reply to my post? Your solution doesn't take into account that not all giveaways of a game after it's been in a bundle were bought in the bundle. World of Goo and Limbo have been in bundles but are on Steam for $9.99. If I bought either of them now to give away, under your scheme, it would still be a bundle game.
Problem not solved.
Comment has been collapsed.
i think, you should at least compare giveaway date and bundle date in order to decide, if the giveaway was a bundle giveaway. that's not 100%, but at least something. that way the contribution level won't go lower with time because of a random giveaway. you may also consider diferent games going lower in price with time and increase a contriburion value with a price, at the time of giveaway (i don't mean the sale price, but the actual price of the game) e.g. dead island was $49.99 back in 2011, and now it's just $19.99. If someone gave it away at that date, he should recieve a full 50 points to contribution value.
otherwise the idea is great
Comment has been collapsed.
also a good idea would be, if someone want's to giveaway a nonbundle copy of a game, that was in bundle, he could proove that copy is non bundle by making you scan his inventory. probbably, that won't be so massive, as it is now with bundle games.
Comment has been collapsed.
Should make this proveable and then have people report their own giveaways for mods to add back contrib value to that particular giveaway based on the proof.
Comment has been collapsed.
In thinking about this, I have to honestly say getting rid of contributor value still seems to be the best option IMHO. Not sure an on/off for contributing at ALL would really be the ideal solution, but tons of giveaways are still private or group only as it is. I don't think this will realistically be considered, but if you wanted an honest opinion, there's mine.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'll third this suggestion. It's not really fair to treat giveaways of bundle keys and giveaways of tradable games that happened to appear in bundles the same way. A simple Contributor = yes/no would simplify the system while still acknowledging the people who give away games to keep this site going.
Comment has been collapsed.
The main problem with this is that it's still abusable by people who'd just throw up one bundle key and suddenly gain contributor status.
How about tiered contributor status? Like, there's a "contributed anything at all" level, a "contributed $100 base price value", a "contributed $500 base price value", and a "contributed $1000 base price value"?
Space them far enough apart and you can have a decent discouragement of completely rampant abuse. Take out the $100 if giving away five Amnesia keys plus change is too easy.
Comment has been collapsed.
Then again you have the problem of how to count some games (in bundles).
There simply will NEVER be a 100% fair treatment. Even if you only count non-bundle keys legit to be part of "the contributor club" someone will give away Fortix and is in it too. No problem with that personally, but lots of people want to be praised for giving away things and would still get upset because someone gave away only a Fortix, while they, the elite and should_be_praised_ones gave away Max Payne 3 and other should bend over now to show their gratitude! (because nothing else is the contributor club right now!)
Comment has been collapsed.
The amount of people threatening to never give away another indie game (or worse, any game at all) again amuses me. Especially it comes from people having the Ship listed in their history. Sure, you claim all your gifts given were Steam tradable; and I have nothing against the Ship (heard nothing but praise for the game); but unless I get two copies of the two-pack in my inventory after redeeming your gift, you are basically giving away something you got for free and should stop complaining.
People, the main point of giving away games is the warm, fuzzy feeling you get inside. I agree that displaying the contribution value is good; otherwise there would be no additional reason to give away anything beyond your first Fortix and I definitely like seeing my own number grow. But it is not the all-inclusive statistic many people think it is.
In my (honest) opinion there are some amazing people in this community, and most of them will not have their contributor value decreased once this here goes live. I will not name names, because someone will certainly get bothered. But even if yours does get slashed, just give away more non-bundled titles. Your bundled giveaways will contribute more and more to your total with each mainstream game you submit. I for one am fine with seeing more of Skyrim and less of the Void (again, nothing against the Void, just an example).
Comment has been collapsed.
Point of contributor value: reward contributors.
This new addition to the system will unfairly punish contributors who can't afford to give anything but the cheaper indie games by removing their contributor value and ability to enter contributor giveaways.
The two policies are directly contradictory.
Case in point, of all my giveaways, only one was a key, a copy of Lara Croft: GoL. All others were giftable steam copies.
Comment has been collapsed.
You emphasize the word punish like they are getting flogged in the town centre. People exploit they're way into contributor giveaways for the same reasons you hold on to every dollar in it.
It's not about belittling your contributions to this community. It's about adjusting the value of specific contributions, because, supply and demand.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thing is, that supply and demand aren't constant over time. Supply increases when a game is featured in a bundle, and then decreases afterwards.
Comment has been collapsed.
"My point was that indie games are usually, if I may over-simplify things, in greater supply than any triple-A titles. Henceforth, an individual indie game giveaway is of less value to this community."
Less direct financial value, maybe.
But just because a game costs less doesn't mean it's any less good. Or bad.
Comment has been collapsed.
Again, supply and demand. The more copies of a given game exists, the less a single copy is worth.
By worth, I mean the amount it should add to the gifters contribution value. By comparison of someone else giving away rarer games. Not because of how valuable the game is to the winner, but how many chances he has to win it (which depends on how many giveaways for the game there is). Economic theory in action. You may not agree, you may say it's unfair, but that doesn't make it less of a fact.
Comment has been collapsed.
Following up on my comment (since you've probably read it by now and editing would be a bit ineffective), I might even argue that if you're talking about "value to this community", rarity of giveaway would be a better indicator than price.
Portal isn't as useful of a contribution to the community as it's easy to come by and enter giveaways for. On the other hand, Analogue (for the same base price) is very, very rarely posted. I'd say, if I were a SteamGifts policymaker, I'd want to figure out how to incentivize Analogue giveaways over Portal giveaways.
Comment has been collapsed.
My updated profile says "$54.97 ($0.00)" -- is this really correct? I didn't give away any keys from bundles. The three games I gave away were all tradable copies; two were extras I got when buying a pack on Steam that had games I already owned, and the other (The Ship) I got from a bundle purchase but confirmed that giveaways of it were allowed (the bundle gave extra copies of the game specifically for you to give them away). Is my contributor credit really going to $0? If so, this is extremely disappointing and discouraging.
Comment has been collapsed.
Looks like it because all the games you've given away have been in bundles. I know it's unfair to those who have given away tradable copies of the games but cg is our master and we must obey him.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes, this is unfair. To treat every game that was ever in a bundle this way, regardless of how it was actually obtained or gifted, is not right. I didn't give away bundle keys, so I don't think I should be penalized like this. I wish there were some way for them to check on this and confirm what were actually bundle keys (bad giveaways) and what wasn't (good giveaways). I'm very disappointed and discouraged right now, because I'm going to be given zero credit for my valid giveaways.
Comment has been collapsed.
The first step should be to do simple coding to check the date of the giveaway and thus confirm whether the giveaway was before it was put into a bundle, actually.
That doesn't solve the problem, but will ameliorate it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Ouch. I still believe eliminating contributor value entirely is the only really viable solution. Someone's going to get screwed otherwise.
Comment has been collapsed.
People like me are getting screwed. I gave away tradable copies of games, not bundle keys, but because they were in bundles at some point, I'm going to get zero credit for it. Maybe eliminating contributor credit would be a better option to avoid unfair treatment of contributors like me.
Comment has been collapsed.
At least you're not going to $0. I won't be able to enter any contributor giveaways once this change goes live. They should account for the fact that tradable copy giveaways (good) are not the same as bundle key giveaways (bad). Unless they can do that, this solution is flawed IMO.
Comment has been collapsed.
Are you getting screwed?
The system is not up yet. This thread is for voicing concerns and posting suggestions.
So be more constructive, and don't act all butthurt because something that is not yet final, might happen.
I do agree that the system should be implemented a bit differently. Games that were given out before they appeared in a bundle should be treated as 'non bundle' games, and one should be able to write to support with a screenshot of their trade history to prove the game he/she gave out isn't a bundle key and get the full $ on his/hers profile.
Comment has been collapsed.
From above: "I wish there were some way for them to check on this and confirm what were actually bundle keys (bad giveaways) and what wasn't (good giveaways)." I have made a suggestion to improve the proposed solution -- they need to distinguish between keys and tradable gifts. As for trade history, I don't think everyone will have that for every game they gave away, because we didn't have a reason to believe that a full record of our gifting history would be needed. I found my inventory history on my profile, but it only has one of the three games I gifted. The other two I sent via e-mail through Steam, but they're not listed in the inventory history and I can't seem to find a record of them.
Comment has been collapsed.
There's an official gift history that's viewable in Steam?
I never knew that. How do I find it? That would be REALLY useful in this debate.
Comment has been collapsed.
Ah, so there is. OK, I do have a record of my three giveaways being tradable copies of the games and not bundle keys. If SG is going to implement this change, then we should be given the opportunity to present our histories as evidence that we didn't give away keys to get full contributor credit, as you suggested. To me, that's the important point -- tradeable game gifts should not be treated the same as bundle key gifts; stopping the latter should not penalize people who did the former.
Comment has been collapsed.
After reading the metric fuckton of comments in this thread, I'm going to say +1.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't really like it. It doesn't make a difference between steam gifts and keys. I made a few giveaways for defense grid in the past. All these were either steamgifts or a key from backing the kickstarter. None of these were from indieroyale. Or what about humble bundle games? I have an EDGE giveaway. EDGE was only offered in Android 1 humble bundle. If my giveaway was from Humblebundle it should come with Anomaly and Osmos in the same key. So my giveaway was clearly a steamgift key. Will that get bundle re-calculation?
Comment has been collapsed.
This was addressed below. People would abuse it like they did with Amnesia. As soon as the bundle with Amnesia came out which included 1 key with multiple games people were submitting it as only "Amnesia" to get around the no-bundle-keys rule.
Check the history of Amnesia and you'll see a huge spike during the bundle.
To sum it up, people will exploit it so this is the only way it can be done.
Comment has been collapsed.
Lovely how they all complain that they lose Contributor Value...>_<
And yes atm I lost nothing of it. But many of the games I gave away will be probably bundle games in the future. So, I dont fucking care. Ill do the giveaways for the people I like and not for my epenis...
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm afraid that is quite egocentric and non-constructive. Many people do care, and cannot (comfortably/easily/happily) make more giveaways only to "regain" their former contributor status. We're not talking about rewarding (by contributor giveaways) people with $100's worth of giveaways, but about rewarding those who gave away a single indie game they bought with their own limited pocket money. I don't think this should be automatically labeled as "worthless".
Comment has been collapsed.
So basically if we wanna allow people who have given at least a certain value of non-exploited games to enter a giveaway, all we need to do is set the giveaway's contributor value to 1/4 higher than we were going to originally...
Wow, that might actually work! I have to say- you guys must be absolute geniuses to have thought of that. :D
Edit: Although, now when I think about it(and read the other posts), some legit people will get affected too. There must be SOME way of checking if it's a key or not, we just have to figure out how. Also, as it is no, it's still vulnerable to abuse...
Comment has been collapsed.
I dont really care, but this is going way further than it should be, from a place meant to faciliate gifting this site has got an awful lot of rules just because certain people want to segregate themselves based on their gift amount, comment number or whatever stat they drool over currently. As far as im concerned you should allow all type of gifts with no restrictions, and give them some badge, different status or whatever when they are so eager to be special and have their own privileged club.
Comment has been collapsed.
While I understand the concerns and policy considerations being debated in this thread, I can't help but agree with you that the whole idea of giving gifts has been kinda lost in the murk.
Comment has been collapsed.
27 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Stakaniy
9 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Stakaniy
30 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by akylen
150 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Menacer
33 Comments - Last post 3 hours ago by sensualshakti
28 Comments - Last post 5 hours ago by MisakiMay
513 Comments - Last post 5 hours ago by FranckCastle
860 Comments - Last post 12 minutes ago by XfinityX
802 Comments - Last post 48 minutes ago by BHTrellis188
30 Comments - Last post 56 minutes ago by venturercatt
134 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Yamaraus
676 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by Ilan14
19 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by KiLLLLeR150
28,156 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by philipdick
Hey everyone, it's no surprise we've been struggling with bundle keys lately, and we're bouncing a lot of ideas back and forth. One suggestion is below, and we're curious to hear what people have to think.
Proposed changes to contributor values
Bundle games, and those freely available at one time or another (Ex. Shadowgrounds), will only add a maximum of 20% to a user's non-bundle contributor value. For example, if a user has submitted $50.00 in non-bundle games, they would have a cap of $10.00 (20% of $50.00) for any bundle games submitted. Therefore, if they submit $10.00 or $10,000.00 in bundles, their contributor value would reach a maximum of $60.00. To further demonstrate, a few scenarios are below.
User #1
Previous value: $119.95. New value: $119.95. They receive full value for Amnesia due to the amount of non-bundle games they have contributed.
User #2
Previous value: $39.98. New value: $23.99. The value of Amnesia drops from $19.99 to the max of $4.00 (20% of the Counter-Strike value) since their non-bundle contributions are quite low.
User #3
Old value: $69.95. New value: $23.99. Same as the above, the max of 20% is reached, so it cannot increase any further through bundle games.
User #4
Old value: $29.98. New value: $0.00. With zero contributions not from bundles, their contributor value remains at zero.
How will this affect your contributor value
Add /update to the end of your profile URL, and you'll see a new contributor value in brackets, next to your existing one. This reflects the updated value, limiting bundle giveaways to 20%. This will have no affect on the vast majority of our users, and only begins to adjust values on those that have submitted a higher than usual amount of bundle games.
Proposed changes to what can be submitted
Lately, the rules are difficult to understand. Certain bundles can only be submitted at given times, and there are over 100 individual bundle games. Users submitting individual bundle keys, whether on accident or on purpose get a bad reputation, and it's the cause of countless arguments. It creates a lot of confusion and brings a negative feel to the entire community, which completely goes against what we're trying to accomplish. The above changes would mean anything can be submitted at any time, and the site will automatically keep contributor values in line. If someone enters a $120 contributor giveaway, you know a minimum of $100 is coming from non-bundle games.
Feedback
No changes have taken place yet. At the moment we're looking for feedback from the community to decide on a fair approach. Please post your thoughts below. Thanks!
Comment has been collapsed.