Nice integration and easy to use. Very nice tool. Maybe not to judge others, but to judge myself. ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, the whole judging thing is a bit difficult. Personally, I would like to have my GAs played - because I put effort into giving away games that I've enjoyed (except for my bundle trash ofc!) - but I also completely understand that some people don't have the time or are just here to make a little cash from trading cards on the side.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's okay and interesting for sure. In my case I was surprised that my average achievement percentage from my SG wins was (even) lower than the one shown on Steam in general. I thought I'd have done better.
P.S. I'd add a screenshot to show what your script does.
Comment has been collapsed.
Good thinking - have added a screenshot to my post.
Comment has been collapsed.
Could you also do a "reverse" script? Something that shows a ranking of all created giveaways, sorted by the playtime the winners invested.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's an interesting idea. Unfortunately re-sorting the results is nigh on impossible - which would certainly limit the usefulness of that feature.
Comment has been collapsed.
I was wondering the same thing (without the sorting). I just would like to see the stats on my Gifts Sent page the same way I do on Gifts Won. Not sure if the overall stats on top would add a lot of benefit for Gifts sent but it would be interesting to see playtime and achievement progress for the individual GAs.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm aware this might be a controversial feature but allow me to offer a different vantage point on it:
The script already allows you to check all the wins of a user so checking just my gibs in relation to that user is actually less intrusive. Or to put it differently: From an entirely self centered perspective I don't care if the other 99 wins (from other people) are not played as long as mine gets played.
So what I'm asking is basically less information than is already provided but more relevant to me personally.
Comment has been collapsed.
Hey Sundance85 - yeah, I hear you loud and clear. This is actually a feature I'm trying to implement at the moment - allowing users to do the same query but on a gift sent page rather than gifts won.
Unfortunately, it seems that in adding this feature, I've caused a bug in my current test version that means cached results are occasionally being lost. And as my workload at work has recently gone up (both to the detriment of my scripts and APG), I haven't had the time to properly debug this issue. If you know Javascript and fancy having a look, I've committed the current version to a test branch on Github - suggestions would be welcome!
Comment has been collapsed.
Sorry, by no means did I mean to rush you ;) I just assumed it might be a controversial feature so I thought maybe you had already decided against it or were still making your mind up so I wanted to offer a new perspective. Obviously real life always comes first. Sadly I'm not familiar with Javascript so I can't be of much help but I greatly appreciate your work to make SG a better place :)
Comment has been collapsed.
Or those who play while they idle, which seems to often cause Steam to totally wonk out on gameplay/achievement reporting for the second game. ^.^
And then there's the fact that Steam seems to just randomly misreport things every so often all on its own.
Oh, and how about falling asleep or having to AFK with a game still running? =O
I'll never argue against people organizing their groups or blacklists to their preferences, but basing off Steam gameplay statistics too often seems only just a step above using an Ouija board or horoscopes, in terms of reliability :X
For example, even my online-only games- that is, the ones that ought be most reliable in gameplay reporting- are all completely off on what they show. Some have 20 hours where I simply left the game running while asleep/AFK. Some have 20 less hours than'd be accurate, because apparently Steam has to trigger the timer right when the game loads, and occasionally that doesn't seem to happen correctly, so the game won't report any gameplay hours during such logins.
Pending Steam updates, Steam sale server issues, idling, lots of things seem to mess with the stat reporting.
Move on to how many of us ignore achievements altogether, and primarily play off-line, [or have specific reason to play off-line, such as to avoid PvP in Dark Souls 1, which didn't have an in-game offline option] and it becomes even an even less reliable SG criteria than something like basing SG giveaways off someone happening to have a game wishlisted [Did they do it on a whim? Were they only using wishlist to keep an eye on the game as it went through EA? Do they use wishlists the same way as you'd expect?], or expecting someone's SG ratio to reliably indicate their Steam library size.
All these things make for good baselines, but none of them are at all reliable (or should be considered as being such). :X
Comment has been collapsed.
Great post. A wonderfully argued case where we see the potential faults in using statistics as a depiction of reality instead of an attempt at modeling it. And you utilized so many specific, real examples resulting in under/over reporting, or none at all. I would whitelist you for it, but you're already on it, so I decided to write this out showing my respect instead. :-)
In addition, I also have some different examples from my own experiences.
For LA Noire, my stats on RockStarSocial for the pc version show 15h-26m-16s of gametime with 26/60 'accomplishments' finished. However steam has me clocked at 1.2 hours and 0/60 achievements. I'm not certain why that's the case, but I do remember having to go through a hundred hoops getting it to run.
And almost anything involving major modding tends to be really off when it comes to my times. There are a lot of things like MGS: Phantom Pain or Dark Souls with partial online elements where its better to go offline when you want to goof around with trainers or certain mods, and only go online when playing for real.
In contrast there's something like Skyrim where I have maybe half the hours credited to me since I tended to tab out to work on mods, dig through modding boards, and all other sorts of activities that easily give way to distraction. There are probably times I've left it going 24+ hours before remembering to close it down... or that my computer was even on still.
Somewhere in between, there's Fallout 3---where my only PC playthrough used Tale of Two Wastelands, a mod that merges it with New Vegas into one contiguous game experience, running through NV's executable. This resulted in 1.2 hours for Fallout 3 and 509 hours for New Vegas.... still probably exaggerated despite both back-to-back since I modded the hell out of them too..
Comment has been collapsed.
Exactly my thoughts :)
Tale of Two Wastelands sounds amazing. I never knew about such thing. A few possible problems arise in my mind when I think about it though. How are things balanced? For example, what is the max level? Even in Fallout 3 itself I reached 30th level too fast (not finishing all DLCs and side quests) making game boring to me. Not talking about the plot and quests in two games because they remain irrelevant of course. Still awesome, thanks for sharing! I will try it when get New Vegas.
I would whitelist you for it
That's what I did to Sooth :D
Comment has been collapsed.
Steam sometimes wonks out without needing any extra help also. I've completed Star Wars Kotor twice now and it only shows 2 hours played.
Comment has been collapsed.
That is a good point, I have added it to the caveat list.
Comment has been collapsed.
Just my whitelist and applicants for our group :P Honestly, if you have a real problem with someone being able to do something like this, I'd suggest setting your profile to private (or friends-only private). I've deliberately not made this extension super easy to use (i.e. you need to have a bunch of clicks to get to the right page and trigger it) because I don't want it to be misused - and also due to issues like game collections not being handled, there's enough error margin to mean you can't really make any full judgements from the output of it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes, I know what you mean and expected this kind of answer. You've given some quite cool and expensive gifts (some of my favorite games) and I think it is reasonable to wish that the games you give away gonna be actally played. On the other hand it does just not feel right for me to systematically check people for these things and to encourage others to do so also because gifting should happen without expectations imho. The social media and internet plaforms already collect more than enough data about each of us. But I see where you are coming from, I would also be happy when the games I gift would be played and don't have a real problem with that (no reason to hide that I have not played most of the games I've won so far, certainly I will at some point). It just seems like a two-sided thing for me I guess.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, some gifters might not care for it, but others might use it systematically, a new way to blacklist people.
Winning a game but not immediately playing it right away, doesn't mean you will never play it in a future, not everyone is a hoarder.
Just saying oh put your profile on private, is an easy answer. Also i see it takes achievements into account, but some don't care for those so it also limits the script.
Comment has been collapsed.
This.
I have many games in my library, bought during last summer sale for real money which I probably won't be able to play for time reasons next... years. That does not mean that I bought them for hoarding, not my mentality. Same for gifts, I do only enter giveaways of games I expect to play. Also setting a profile to private is not really an option as you said. There are quite a view things I want to share on my profile, it would be a shame to suppress that for a script offered on a great but low priority site. I appreciate the effort the TO spent both into his quality giveaways and this script however I would prefer it if these kind of user selections would be limited to specific groups only.
Apart from that it is interesting to have a serious in depth discussion here :)
Comment has been collapsed.
+1
like i said below, i see no good use from this script being public.. imo it should of been integrated into a webpage for specific group use, and left to private use only.. the public aspects will only bring out blacklist frenzies.
Comment has been collapsed.
I, personally, will never blacklist anyone based on the results of this script. I might be less likely to add them to my whitelist, or perhaps remove them from it, but for me there's just too many mitigating circumstances for this script to be used to actively prevent others from ever winning my games. I've tried to emphasise this by providing the list of caveats (which I keep expanding as other edge-cases appear).
I would love to gift without any expectations - but if someone (say) won a relatively expensive GA from me with the sole intent of earning maybe $1 from idling and selling the cards - well, I'd just feel like I'd wasted my money. I'd have preferred to just give them a $1 and give the game to someone who actually wanted to play it.
Comment has been collapsed.
The whole idling and card farming thing is a plague, agreed, I would also prefer giving $1 :)
Comment has been collapsed.
so we got two new things lately...
a site that will cause a ton of whitelists = http://sgwhitelist.azurewebsites.net/
a script that will cause a ton of blacklists = https://www.steamgifts.com/discussion/NyDOv/tool-do-you-even-play-bro-gmtm-userscript
lovely ☹️
btw, your script doesn't work if people are already using a script that adds a 5th button on that page... in my case i had to turn off daerphens profile link buttons (this)
edit: both buttons show if yours is above his in script order though.
Comment has been collapsed.
additionally, your script can't tell if i play games thru family share... which does happen.... :P
edit: also it's certainly not correctly getting achievements.. i won rocket league and i have 38/70 achievements from it.. yet script says i've only gotten 1 achievement from all 335 games i've won.
Comment has been collapsed.
yet script says i've only gotten 1 achievement from all 335 games i've won.
The script only lists there in how many won (or more precisely in how many played, among those) games you got achievements, not how many achievements you got in total.
So it seems that you only got achievements in Rocket League on this account.
Comment has been collapsed.
i'm still fairly certainly i've gotten achievements from more then 1x single game. but whatever..
i see no good use come from this script being public though.. sure it's great for a private group that requires that sorta thing, but publicly it'll just be used to go on blacklist frenzies. ☹️
Comment has been collapsed.
Eh, I'm not so sure that it will have such a negative impact. We already knew that the vast majority can't play as much as they win. Those who use the script, will figure out pretty fast what those numbers mean.
Comment has been collapsed.
new script request: a script that gathers all appid's of games won and idles those games for 20mins... 100% play rate ^^ :P
new script request 2: a script that launches SAM and ticks the box for 1x achievement in each games... 100% achievement rate ^^ :P
Comment has been collapsed.
Result: Blacklists for everyone who seems to have used those scripts. Sorry for those honest 100% achievers! ;-P
Comment has been collapsed.
you get what i mean though... okay so it's adjusted to be 87.9% (or your own setting) achievement rate / 332/336 games played... for realisim. :P
people already jump to conclusions as it is. like i said before, there is this nice steam feature called family sharing.. steamgifts rules do not state games must be played first of all, but even if users wish they were, they could be playing them thru family share.. several of my wins were for my kids, they play them on their accounts thru family share.
Comment has been collapsed.
We'll see, but as with everything, there'll be people who'll feel the upper hand now at judging others. Hopefully not enough to be noticable.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks for the error report - will look into it.
I honestly don't want this script to be used to cause a ton of blacklists. I have tried to make it as user-unfriendly for bulk checking as I can, as well as listing a number of mitigating circumstances that might cause incorrect results.
Comment has been collapsed.
no problem, it may be accurate afterall, i don't really know. but i fell like i've certainly played more then one game that ive won and received achievements.
i hope it doesn't, and it may not really to much.. it's certainly better then just releasing it in a webpage form and entering in steamgifts ids to get the same results. most script users probably are going to just use it for group use and checks, I just fear those that are seeking a blacklist collection. not so much me personally, but fear for others..
edit: i realized afterwords on report you meant the button issue.. np on that ^^
Comment has been collapsed.
Why would playing your Steamgifts wins cause blacklisting? :p
Comment has been collapsed.
wrong question.. "why would NOT playing your steamgifts wins cause blacklistings?"
with the question in that form i think it kind answers itself.
Comment has been collapsed.
I was being cheeky :p I know most people don't play 90% of their wins, I don't judge since a lot of games simply shouldn't be played, though it does make me sad sometimes to see some people with several good game wins that are left completely untouched.
Comment has been collapsed.
oh well yeah, if it filtered out the garbage and showed only those that should be played i really don't think anybody'd have a reason to complain about it. well besides still offline players. but as it is, it just doesn't have all the variables and couldn't possibly. family share and offline mode both are still something to take into major consideration. i'm not trying to say most or even half my wins were played thru family share, but still at least a couple dozen of them have been.
this is a site for me to randomly trade out 3-4x games for 1x to strangers or group members, mostly junk both ways. i send out the occasional "gem game" and i win the occasional "gem game", but mostly junk overall. but even alot of that junk between my 3x children, somebody in my family share circle is likely to play them eventually.
i do however skip the occasional gem that i purchase and even ga those too. but that's something tools like these (or rather the way i fear most people would use these types of tools i mean) don't take into consideration either.. grim dawn & stardew valley are not in my library, but are in my sent GA list. ;)
sorry for ramble. this actually wasn't directed or meant for you at all, just used you as an excuse to reply and rant further about this script.
edit: typos and extended apology
Comment has been collapsed.
Never realised you had such a big family :) I do only enter for games I really want to play, but I try to keep an open mind and realize not everyone thinks the same way as me. And as you said there are sometimes other factors we don't realize. I don't think people should be punished or rewarded for playing their games, but for what kind of person they are instead. But I also believe in groups like "Actually Playing Games" for when you want to give away a game that actually gets played. You don't have to apologize, it wasn't that much of a ramble ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
i try to stay fair about what i enter into, if it's bundled even including hb monthly then it's a pretty sure bet if i don't own it ill try my shot at winning it even if i'm not necessarily interested in it myself. but when it comes to something that has a hefty or even half decent price-tag on it, i decide whether i'd actually play it or not before i enter. just like i did for grim dawn & stardew valley, i dont think i'd play them so i passed and gave them away instead of redeem. even those i still enter and see if i win back, they were cheap still imo, but i leave that to fate.
Comment has been collapsed.
I think that's pretty fair, too bad most people don't even consider that and just enter anything and everything. But that's human nature I guess. I still like you buddy :)
Comment has been collapsed.
well i admit when i first came here i certainly did enter any and everything. i think just about everybody does though just to see if they can even win. then once the wins start rolling in that's when some people (myself included) deter from doing that and start to only enter into those with their own personal circumstances. n' thanks, likes you too ^^
Comment has been collapsed.
I didn't, but yeah I think a lot of people do it, so I wouldn't worry too much about it. Though I enter for even fewer games than I did when I first came now.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm just curious about who you think would do all the blacklisting you mention.
As this script shows, not many users on Steamgifts have played/finished a whole lot of their played games, playing no or just a few games seems to be very common, and playing 50% or more seems to be very uncommon.
If it was the other way around, that almost everyone had 50% played games or more, and just 10-20 users would have very few played games, maybe then there would be blacklists, but right now, having played just a few or no games is being like almost everyone else. I think the risk of being blacklisted would be very slim.
I think this tool will rather be used for whitelists, for the people who want to do whitelist giveaways for games they hope will get played.
Comment has been collapsed.
well i guess nobody since it makes me look like the epitome of those who don't play their wins and i've yet to be blacklisted since this script popped up. but it's just common around SG for people to use tools such as these to create a blacklist. luckily as it's been pointed out though this isn't exactly a user-friendly tool and only those that are knowledgeable on how stuff works around here will be using it, so it won't be as bad as i made it out to sound i suppose.
Comment has been collapsed.
Don't sweat it. If someone seriously would start using the script on everyone to check who haven't played "enough" and starting blacklisting everyone the script showed "bad" enough stats for, they would run out of blacklist spots very quickly, and it's very likely that their public giveaways would still end up with winners they would have blacklisted according to those "rules" if they had enough slots and more time to go over all 900k+ users on Steamgifts :)
It's just not a good idea for someone who don't want "low pecentage winners" to use it for blacklisting. Much easier to whitelist people who play their won games if it's important it's one of those who win the giveaway.
I'll continue do as I've always done - see it as a nice bonus if a winner of one of my public/forum invite only/general group giveaways ends up playing the game, and give away a few select games I hope end up being played to my whitelist/group meant for that.
Comment has been collapsed.
Offcourse we take different priorities on games we want to play (first) but you implying you don't play certain won games ever?
Or just wanting to own them because of a memory..? :?
Also that group is mentioned in the op..
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh yeah i haven't played all my wins either (big big backlog) but atleast it's my true intention to play each and every single one i have eventually (evein my library), because i always been, always will be a gamer, and still somewhat "young" enough.
Offcourse time will be a factor on if we actually can do that, we can get hit by a bus tommorow for all we know.
Your post however sounded atleast like you would play not play certain games period, and there are some people that just want games for the have, and probably not how you meant it, and even so, to each it's own i guess.
Some collect stamps, or sugar packets and they just look at it too.
Comment has been collapsed.
I do understand, really. When I first joined this website, I went around joining every GA I recognised the name of. But when I started winning games that I realised I had no plans on ever playing, I felt that I shouldn't be entering GAs just for the sake of it. But I really do understand that mind set and I'm 99% sure that most GA creators aren't that bothered about it. I just wanted to offer a tool for those who do care.
Comment has been collapsed.
personally i don't expect people to play my games and i don't want people to expect me playing theirs, don't get me wrong, i'm definitely planning on playing them, but i have a big collection and not a lot of time, and i'm sure many people here are the same, regardless have a bump for a nice userscript.
Comment has been collapsed.
This feels a bit... Revealing. :c I also almost need an entire page for profiles now!
I do feel bad for how little I've played my wins... But you know? Games should be enjoyed, and depression has been a bitch lately, I'd probably not enjoy playing much with how I've felt recently. I'd rather save them so I can properly enjoy them for what they are.
Comment has been collapsed.
I completely agree, I have some games that are very far on my backlog for very similar reasons. You definitely shouldn't feel bad for having a backlog and I don't want people to interpret this as an encouragement to attack those who do have a backlog.
Comment has been collapsed.
How long is this supposed to take ? It doesn't seem to work for me
Comment has been collapsed.
Hmm, interesting. I might need to add some actual debug logging to the script. How long the script takes depends on a couple of things - how many games the user has won, etc. The script requests 1 page (25 games) from SG every 0.5 second, so a win count of >1000 will take upwards of 20 seconds. And then the script will start querying the Steam API for achievements stats.
It might be the case that the Steam API key you provided was incorrect? In which case I have no idea what the script will do... Will push out a version with improved logging, if you'd be okay running it again later?
Comment has been collapsed.
yes sure
I didn't have a API key so I generated one just before I started using the script, so I don't see why it would be incorrect
Comment has been collapsed.
Okay - I've just pushed out a new version of my script with a) the ability to remove your cached API key (although from what you've said, it's unlikely that's the issue) and b) a bugfix. Could you update the script (the latest version is 1.1.0) and see whether you're seeing the same issues? Also, does my extension work on any users page (for instance mine) or no-one's?
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks, it's working fine now. Maybe I didn't copypaste my key correctly the first time, I don't know
Comment has been collapsed.
Some thoughts :
Would we able to play and finish all games we give away ?
-> on average we have a 1:1 ratio sent / win
-> next question :
Would we able to play and finish all games we win ?
How much time of gameplay would it take you to complete your Steam library ?
Comment has been collapsed.
https://www.howlongtobeatsteam.com/ is better imho. It has far more details and options.
Comment has been collapsed.
This seems like a cool idea. Granted, I haven't played most of my wins... nor many of my sale purchases for that matter. Like when I pre-purchased Tales of Zestiria so I could get Tales of Symphonia for free then never played either of them >< Same story with GTA5, lol
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't think you have to worry about mirrors but maybe I should follow that method :P
Comment has been collapsed.
if you don't want to break your mirror you can always stick a photo. it will make you feel happy about yourself, it just needs some self-deception 😍
Comment has been collapsed.
Damn, do I look good, even if I took a more feminine look ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, I'm sorry if it made you sad. But I will put it like this - you were on my whitelist before I wrote the script and you remain on it now. SGs is more than just how many achievements you've got or games you've played.
But anyway, your stats are good, if not very good.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm kind of too lazy to bother getting this and checking myself but I don't think my stats would be amazing
Comment has been collapsed.
Odd, for some reason nothing happens when I try to check your account. The button just doesn't react, despite your account not being private.
Comment has been collapsed.
Maybe the script knew that you'd have your cake soon. Mighty cake day shield! :p
Comment has been collapsed.
+1, i checked when i saw the post @ 15seconds.. thought i'd just try later, but no, still cannot either.
Comment has been collapsed.
This issue has been fixed in the latest version of the script (1.1.0).
Comment has been collapsed.
nah, it's running just fine.. slow on achievement gathering with his massive win count, but still going.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm 90% sure Steam includes all games with playtime that have achievements (regardless of whether you've actually achieved any of them - as every so often I'll give a game a quick try and my achievement average drops suddenly). You are correct though, I am unfairly biasing the achievement stats - will change it in the next release.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm 90% sure Steam includes all games with playtime that have achievements
Hm... it's been some time, since my completion-rate made recognisable jumps when I started playing something new, but I think it is only affected by games where you actually unlock an achievement. At least that's how I perceived it.
I would have said I'm 90% sure that the average game-completion rate only counts games, where you have at least one achievement unlocked. Though, jeah... I'm not sure, maybe in your case the completion-rate drop is connected to games that got new achievements added?
Hm, I did a quick search and found this thread.
Comment has been collapsed.
Fair enough, that seems decisive enough. The next version 1.1.2 will use that calculation (i.e. sum the achievement percentages and divide by the number of games with at least one achievement).
Comment has been collapsed.
Well I actually misunderstood the suggestion by Ariandel and I'm not so sure anymore which option is the better one.
I guess the new way would be better, since with the statistic on how many achievement-games have at least one achievement unlocked, you cover the information, the old one would have given, already. So adding the achievement completion-rate, would give an addiotinal information about how the user plays their games.
Let's say in my case, as someone who tries to get 100% in most games, it would give a better picture on how I play my wins: I haven't played 1/4 of my achievement-wins, but try to achieve a high completion rate when I start them.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, I think my script was effectively double counting those games with achievements that you hadn't got by providing that information twice (but once hidden within the percentage). I've gone with the way Steam works unless anyone has a compelling argument against it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, I've made that change and it's in the latest version of my script (1.1.2).
Comment has been collapsed.
1.1.3* (or i'm speaking to you from the future :P)
Comment has been collapsed.
Okay, okay, 1.1.2 and later ;)
I can't help that I keep making silly little mistakes...
Comment has been collapsed.
sorry, sometimes i just can't help myself on the lame jokes.
like the update though, made it look a hair better for me.. went from 0.02% achievement rate percentage to 54.3% =)
and great add with the api key cache delete xD
Comment has been collapsed.
It seems we will have new unofficial rules here because of this script. Thank you for it, really. SG will be even more unfriendly place. The fact that we get blacklist for making events, winning GAs, making GA, creating threads without gibs, and so on, is not enough. Now we will get them also because of restrictions of an user script or just don't playing games within a limit. I think you should make this functionality just within a group or webpage and not here. Not all people are able to use it correctly.
- Not playing a game within a week or month - blacklist
- Playing a game offline - blacklist
- Playing a game through family sharing - blacklist
- Not working or crashing won game - blacklist
- Stopping to play a game after you find out you don't like it at all - blacklist
- Farming cards before you start to play it - blacklist
- Playing without gaining achievements - blacklist (because it looks as if you just farmed cards)
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh i got blacklistekd for funnier reasons.
People always have to learn to be responsible with tools - there are no shortcuts.
If people start to hate each other for every little thing then it's more a problem that is rooted in the community. Maybe people should work more on how they perceive things. That means, "do they really need to use the blacklist function all the time?" But also how they feel about getting blacklisted, "is it really that important?"
I absolutely understand that some people want to give their games to people, who value their gifts, instead to those who just farm the games for cards - and this is a good tool for those! This tool rather helps those users in shaping their whitelist or their giveaway groups. I honestly don't think that people are often blacklisted just for not playing their games. What I see as more of a problem is, that some gifter just lose the joy in giving away games, as they see that winners just don't value their gifts.
I mean I saw some people commenting here, that they eventually want to play all their games - I want that too - but that is just not gonna happen. Everyday more games are releases and time is a limited ressource for all of us.
In the end, we are just not able to play all the games.
The backlog is an ever-growing thing, and if one doesn't actively decide and stop increasing it - and that means especially stop joining all the giveaways when it is too much, then there is no chance that all those wins will ever be valued.
If some people can't see that, then at least a gifter, who wishes to have more winners that play their games, has now a tool with that they can shape their groups or whitelists.
Again, I don't think that this information will result in more blacklists for people. If they land on them then it's probably because they have already shown that hey don't really value gifts.
Nevertheless: Users have to learn to be responsible with those tools and not jump to grave conclusions with the statistics this tool provides (same with SGTools and those unactivated wins), but I do think that it is good that this tool is available for the general public.
Edit: Ungh..... again a wall of text... sorry... I mean... I don't even write coherently.... ...
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh my god, your stats are flawless =o
You should have a profile like this -
Comment has been collapsed.
Shhhhh, or people think this is my evil scam-method to get on shiny new whitelists!
Sadly in APG are quite few people who played even more of their wins, and put a lot more time into these, too. Unfair! D:
But, jeah, I'm happy with my play-rate! :D
Comment has been collapsed.
There has always, and always will be, unofficial flavour of the month rules.
One time it was less than £30.00 worth of GA'S.
Then bad level.
Then poor ratio.
Then group to public ratio.
Then dev keys.
Etc etc etc.
Try and stay out if it, pay no attention to unofficial rules and give based on your own preferences.
Comment has been collapsed.
Looks neat, but I'm not very tech savvy so this concept of API confuses and infuriates me. Is there anyone who can explain what it is and why I need it?
Comment has been collapsed.
Steam provides an API that allows programs like my script to make queries for information like game playtimes or achievements gained by a user. However, in order to prevent a script from making too many queries, they require the query includes a key, that uniquely identifies who's making the query. Ideally I'd just put my API key in the script - but under Valve's T&Cs, I'm not allowed to share it. So you have to get your own key to use the script and make the queries.
Comment has been collapsed.
Ah, so it's to prevent Steam being flooded with requests basically? Thanks for explaining that makes more sense :)
Comment has been collapsed.
It seems that your script is 'blind' regarding some accounts. It just won't start to fetch data for them. This is one and that another, that I found.
Comment has been collapsed.
Got it - turns out some GAs don't have the Steam icon (usually old Humble Bundles or games removed from Steam). Will fix this issue in the next release.
Edit: fixed in version 1.1.0.
Comment has been collapsed.
Offline mode rules them all !
^^ woow, I knew steam data where inaccurate; but just looking at my win to check , I got a surprise. But 1/15 wrong is OK.
Cause looking at other games/software it's funnier :
- game maker studio: 0.2h on record ( between the tutorials and the humble gamjam #2, and other tinkering, sure I did it in no time :D )
- forge of gods > 200h ^^ yep, having a game runinng in the background every day (to get the extra gems for "playing" between 19h00-19h05.gave some impressive stats)
thx, finally Big brother can watch, without really knowing me :D ( what's sad is how other are going to rely on those inaccurate data :-( )
p.s.
guess the game I played most this weekend ^^. ( hint: it still has 0h on record on my steam profile )
.
Comment has been collapsed.
If the game is played in offline mode, what happen to the achievements?
I've never tried offline mode because I'm afraid Steam will not count my progress.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks for the answer.
If not all games have that, I will never play offline.
Comment has been collapsed.
Many, many games don't count achievements though, and practically the only way to know which do and which don't is trying it yourself.
Play time is also never recorded, so if you manage to 100% a game offline and sync it back, prepare to be called an achievement cheater.
Comment has been collapsed.
That'd be suck.
I will never play offline then.
Thanks for the answer.
Comment has been collapsed.
Offline can be a good idea, but only if you don't care about maintaining your public Steam stats. I do, so I only play with community offline, but I know some people don't give a single damn about Steam's social aspects.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't see any benefit to play offline when the internet is up.
I think it doesn't take much quota, and most home internet now have unlimited quota anyway.
Maybe some use it for privacy or other reason, but that's not my case.
The only time I might play offline are when the internet goes down, which is pretty rare for me. I asked about this in case my internet goes down while I'm playing the game. If there's a possibility the game doesn't record achievement offline, then I'll save and quit the game right away and wait for my internet back.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, talgaby is referring to sites like Astats, who make assumptions about cheating based on the unlock date of achievements. They are pretty harsh, but I have offline-unlocks, too, and I'm not marked as a cheater.
It really comes down to what you play while offline. If you claim you were offline and achieved all the achievements in e.g. Super Meat Boy (and thus they have all the sameunlock date when you are back online), they mark your profile as suspected of achievement-hacks, but that can be temporary if you can proof them otherwise (with a vid of you playing).
But if you are just playing through a game like Half-Life 2 and unlock half of the story achievements, while offline, then nobody will care.
You don't have to worry, if you have to play offline sometimes.
Just don't play the hardest games out there, while you are offline. It's better to leave them for when you are online and it can be recorded :D
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't care much about achievements, so for me it's not a problem.
What is bothering me is how people rely so much on the data valve collect and publish on profile. It's not the holy truth XD
and how some can just become hateful on behalf of what they believe for what they see on those profile is scarring me.
I'm sure that offline time never count as play time on steam.
For achievement, I'm not sure it works the same for every games. But I'm sure I had multiple achievements unlocked at once. So some game record the achivements offline, and valid them the next time you play online.
Comment has been collapsed.
I also have friends just like you. He just play for the story.
Well for me, if the game has easy achievements, I'll try to 100% them.
Not because so that other people praise me, it's just for my satisfaction. I'm happy to see my perfect games counter got +1.
What I hate is when the developer added more achievements at later time, and even worse if some of them are DLC exclusive achievements. Shitty way to milk money.
What is bothering me is how people rely so much on the data valve collect and publish on profile. It's not the holy truth XD
and how some can just become hateful on behalf of what they believe for what they see on those profile is scarring me.
There will always people like that. Don't bother about them too much.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks to this, now I learnt that they added achievements to the Steam version of Fahrenheit. Almost a good bait, but no way in hell I'm going through that pure torture of a control scheme again.
Nice script, by the way. Showed me what I always suspected, that people over 10% play time in their won games are most likely among the very, very small minority.
Comment has been collapsed.
They added them several months ago, around april/may I think. I love Fahrenheit, but I haven't played the Steam version yet, are the controls really that bad?
Didn't need a script to realize that :D
Comment has been collapsed.
The controls are as atrocious as they ever were, the Steam version just has some better textures essentially. Since I missed out that game when it came out, I played it for the first time last year, and it was not a pleasant experience. And I'm a narrative-preferring person in video games, whose third main genre besides RTS and cRPGs are point 'n' clicks.
Comment has been collapsed.
Ah, I don't remember the controls being that bad the last time I played the game but that was a while ago. I think I remember the controls being annoying for the QTE's like the guitar playing. I only played the game (non Steam version) after I played Heavy Rain and Beyond: Two Souls. I love Quantic Dream games, even if this one is a bit dated. Like you I too love narrative and also point and click adventure games.
Comment has been collapsed.
I didn't recall having problems with it, besides the stealth sections being super annoying :|
Comment has been collapsed.
Was that with the little boys and the search lights in the camp?
Comment has been collapsed.
I think two times, as a continous story, yes - sneaking into the military base's secret building
Comment has been collapsed.
It's a been a while for me, so I vaguely remember that and being annoyed at the QTE's for the guitar ^^ But I will be replaying it somewhere in the future for the achievements.
Comment has been collapsed.
Not surprising news but that will make someone sad panda.
Comment has been collapsed.
Nice script.
Works like a charm for me.
I like how you limit it to 0.5 seconds per page request.
And for blacklisting because won games not played, it can also work the other way.
People will start playing their won games, and some people who actually played their won games might get whitelisted because of this script.
Just like knives, just because it can be used to hurt or even kill other, doesn't mean knives are dangerous and shouldn't have been invented. The one who do bad things are the users, not the tools. Don't blame tools if they are used for bad things.
Comment has been collapsed.
yeah, but where i live knives are only purchasable by those that are over the age of 18 and show identification. this website is a bunch of children that were just handed a machete to play with.
Comment has been collapsed.
a bunch of children that were just handed a machete to play with
Aw come on d3m4n, I don't see why people are upset that they get blacklisted because of a tool like this?
The majority of this sites users doesn't play a lot of their wins. It doesn't make sense! People would hate* others for the same stuff they do.
As Ruphine said, and I think that's true, too: It's more likely that people get whitelisted, because some gifter just want to have people on their whitelist, that play most of their games - especially when they plan to give away something more pricey. It would be shame if such a game stays unplayed until it gets bundled.
Comment has been collapsed.
i haven't (afaik) been blacklisted over it, nor even really fear it for myself.. blacklisting me will have no effect on me still continuing to win.. but i'm still not thrilled with the idea that a tool exists that's only purpose is to find people who don't do something that others would like aka don't play their wins, when it's not a rule of the site it's being used on.
if this tools intent was for groups, then make it for groups and not individuals.. i wouldn't be complaining if it were designed to work solely from the group page. since that was the creators intent, was for groups, why was it made to work on individual winner pages? if it were a script that only functioned from the group page, then you could only check people in groups in whole. then nobody is being singled out and being directly judged. goto group page, run a scan on the entire group at once, and have two sort options, sort users by most played games won, or by most achievements received. nobody is being singled out and judged that way.. and it effectively checks the group to make sure the people in said group are playing their wins... same end result, without the singling out of one individual.
but no, this script is designed to go and scan only one user at a time, allowing individual judgment rather then group checks.
Comment has been collapsed.
That you can only look at someones profile one at a time is a good thing. It doesn't put anyone in comparisson thus can't make a judgement.
I mean this tool doesn't actively scan and hunt for people on how they play their games. It just provides statistics about how a certain individual used their wins, based on the informations they themselves provided. I'd get that information, too, if I just looked at someones steamprofile. This tool just makes that easier for me - if I want to know it.
I mean there are so many worse tools and statistics, that actually try to just paint a single picture of a person, I don't know why you specifically have a problem with this one? It is not judging you.
This tool is just satisfying the curiostiy of gifters here, that are unsatisfied with how some people value their gifts and those can use this tool to feel better about giving away stuff -> e.g. shape their whitelist with it, since that's a common place to give away the "better games".
But what this tool doesn't do is just checking users and calling them out how badly they play their games. This information is not published on a website or made into a list to show how well everyone performs in playing their games.
I mean, what if it was for group use only? It would sort people on how they perform! That's even worse! That actually puts people in comparisson and shows "who's the best" or "who's the worst"! As if that matters!
I understand that some people don't like that others may easily judge them by "how well they performed in games", but it is not like people already judge others on some silly ideas.
And it's not like this information wasn't already public.
If these tools are only in the hands of tech sawwy guys, then only those will have the "power" about those informations and how they are provided. People will have to - in any case - learn to not jump to conclusions based on some statistic - and that needs to be done, anyway. I think it's better if it's just a statistic about playing games.
Comment has been collapsed.
It just provides statistics about how a certain individual used their wins
extremely false statistics. it doesn't take family share or offline mode into consideration. not to mention the times steam api is down.
This tool just makes that easier for me - if I want to know it.
it also makes it easier for people to go on blacklist frenzies, i never claimed this info wasn't already public, but making it simpler to find makes it simpler to go on blacklist frenzies.
This tool is just satisfying the curiostiy of gifters here, that are unsatisfied with how some people value their gifts
this tool does not give the details necessary to properly determine whether they've actually played their games or not. (really that is gonna be my argument for most of what you said)
I mean, what if it was for group use only? It would sort people on how they perform! That's even worse!
that's your opinion, i'd rather be judged along with 30-40 different people even if i'm the very bottom user, rather then the way it currently appears for me.. currently it looks like out of 336 wins, i've played only 1x... when that is 100% inaccurate....
zero arguments on the last paragraph. that's the one super grateful thing about this. i am thrilled it wasn't released as a webpage checker.
again though, this tool doesn't have all the details to be a proper functioning tool, and it simply cannot due to offline & family sharing. so it effectively tells you false statistics and lies about people really.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm not claiming that this tool provides complete information and that it doesn't have flaws. I think Sooth pointed a lot of these out in his post. That's why I said that people have to learn to not jump to conclusions that easily!
But tell me, did you really play all of your not play games through family sharing or in offline mode?
You yourself said above that you:
try to stay fair about what i enter into, if it's bundled even including hb monthly then it's a pretty sure bet if i don't own it ill try my shot at winning it even if i'm not necessarily interested in it myself
You even say, that you don't intent to play all your wins in the end.
Now, just because the tool only says that you only achieved achievements in one out of 336 games - and I absolutely believe; I'm sure you played more games and even finished them -, but doesn't it go in the direction that the tool shows?
Is that really so far off? .I don't judge you about that, really. I'm sure you play your wins, but I also do not think that you played most of your wins.
I mean this tool also shows me in a far better light, since it misses some of the packages, I haven't played. But the general information, that I play a lot of my wins, is somehow correct.*
I see that, you are unsatisfied that this tool can't provide complete information. Yes that's absolutely true and uusers should be aware of that.But, I mean again, you are not called out on your performance. You are not judged by it, since it stays priavte for a person who is curious about this information.
If people want to go on "blacklist" frenzies let them do it, they would do so anyway, but you should also let people have their tools to shape their whitelists and so they can feel better about giving away stuff.
Comment has been collapsed.
But tell me, did you really play all of your not play games through family sharing or in offline mode?
no hell no, not even remotely.. not even half of them.. (beyond cardfarm).. and even those that were played, were not necessarily played by me directly, but a family member of mine in some of the cases. (probably a cple dozen of my wins were played by my children)
Is that really so far off?
hard to say, if people are going off the games ran and idled as well, then no not far off at all.. but if people think i've only genuinely played one single win, then yeah it's quite a long ways off, by at least a couple dozen times.
If people want to go on "blacklist" frenzies let them do it, they would do so anyway
that's very true. excellent point there.
i think i'm done complaining about this one, the knife analogy just made it too easy though. on the flipside though like you said, the tech savvy are the ones that will be using this, and that is i suppose the metaphorical "showing your id to purchase the knife" xD
Comment has been collapsed.
but if people think i've only genuinely played one single win, then yeah it's quite a long ways off,
Well, I hope they don't. It would be dumb of them to assume that. Maybe kelnage can make this cleare in the initial post on how people should perceive this tool.
that's very true. excellent point there.
Well it wasn't a point.
I just believe that people want to shit on each other in any case. It won't just change, if they have less reasons. They'll find new ones, if they want to. That is more the problem imho.
Comment has been collapsed.
I didn't know there is such rule in other country.
Let's just hope SG community becomes more mature 😁
Comment has been collapsed.
Hey, this turned out awesome! Great tool for adding some users to my whitelist for those giveaways where I hope the game I give away ends up being played. This discussion turned out to be a lot about blacklisting, but I don't think it will end up being used for blacklisting. I'm pretty sure we all know that:
- The average Steamgifts user doesn't have a very high completion rate for won games.
- There are too many things the script can't cover (offline mode, family sharing), so it's not going to give exact results.
I'm prepared to see low percentages for many users, I know it is that way, and some of those are on my whitelist anyway. I'm aware that not everyone plays every game they win, and I'm fine with that. I would never blacklist anyone for this, it's not like Steamgifts has any rules about playing all the games you win. On the other hand, if I spend €60 on a brand new game I really would want someone to play and enjoy, it's a good tool for selecting some users who are more likely to play that game.
Enough about that, and back to the script again:
It's not easy to discover in the original post, but I stumbled upon that the won page also shows individual stats for each game (see screenshot below), pretty cool stuff! Would it be possible to mark items (collections/special editions including DLC) in the win list that could not be processed?
Also, if anyone wonders about the tags in the picture below, they are from the Arise version of SG Game Tags by Ruphine:
Comment has been collapsed.
Hey tso184, why did you ignore my application for the "Actually Playing Games" group ;_;? Are the applications closed for that group or did you not want to add me? It's fine if you don't, I just want to know.
Comment has been collapsed.
Nope, I just had so much to do last week, and I've been away during the weekend and only checked SG from the phone, back today and dealing with Steamgifts one thread at the time :)
Sorry for the wait!
Comment has been collapsed.
Ah, that explains a lot, thanks for not ignoring me ^^
Comment has been collapsed.
I did some debugging and it seems this script is causing it:
More specifically, this line of your script:
$(".sidebar__shortcut-inner-wrap").children(":last-child").attr("href").match(/http:\/\/steamcommunity.com\/profiles\/([0-9]*)/)[1];
I suggest changing it to:
$('[data-tooltip="Visit Steam Profile"]').attr("href").match(/http:\/\/steamcommunity.com\/profiles\/([0-9]*)/)[1];
Comment has been collapsed.
Ah, yes, that would be a problem. Your solution seems reasonable to me - will put it in the next release. Thanks for your help.
Comment has been collapsed.
Hey, quick suggestion for you. When you go to add your API, but aren't ready to supply it (as I just did), the input pop-up blocks you from moving to another tab to go get the value. Clicking cancel just pops the window back up (whereas clicking OK with a blank value allows you to move on). It would be nice if the cancellation actually stopped the process. ;)
I dealt with that on my own user script, so let me know if would like any specific suggestions.
Otherwise, thanks for a cool script!
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks for the suggestion - I've fixed the script so it won't do that any more.
Comment has been collapsed.
With the creation of Actually Playing Games, we've been finding it rather useful to be able to check for a given SteamGifts user how much they actually play the games they win here. Obviously most SG users don't have a BLAEO account - and just viewing a users profile in Steam takes a while and is difficult to filter down to just SG wins. So I've written a userscript for Tampermonkey for Firefox or Chrome that, when viewing the wins page for a user, allows you to quickly fetch some statistics about how much (i.e. playtime) and how well (i.e. achievements achieved) that user does for their wins.
Download the userscript from Github
IMPORTANT: this extension requires a Steam API key to function. You need to go to this page and register for one if you do not already have one (the domain name can be one you make up - its not important).
To use it, once you've installed the userscript in GM/TM, just go to any user's gifts won page and click on the button labelled "Provide API key", paste your API key into the prompt (this is cached hereafter), and then click on the new button labelled "Fetch Playing Info". You'll see the additional rows of the table slowly fill up as the information comes back from the Steam API, as well as individual games having their info updated in the rows below. The extension caches all the results it can and tells you when the cache was last updated.
Caveats: there are some considerable omissions that this script cannot deal with or be worked around:
Warning: if you use this extension too many times in a day, there is a possibility Steam will block your API key for a period of time and the results that come back will be incorrect or none at all.
Changelogs
2018-01-23: New feature! Do You Even Play, Bro? now queries How Long to Beat (HLTB) for each game, and enriches both the list of games and adds some summary statistics to the table. This makes it easier to compare a users playtime to the consensus about how long a game should take, especially useful for games without any achievements.
2017-12-15: The latest version of Greasemonkey for Firefox 57 has broken a number of things (internal API changes, as well as installing userscripts from GitHub). Rather than waiting for them to fix all these issues, I instead suggest Firefox 57 users move to Tampermonkey since it has neither of these issues.
2017-07-07: Added a new feature of charting a user's cumulative achievement percentage (put your cursor over the graph for more details). Users can switch between the two styles by clicking on the link next to "Games with Achievements".
2017-05-20: With many thanks to BarefootMonkey for spotting it, my script no longer includes DLC in the counts - so hopefully those of you who have won individual DLC or collections that included DLC should see your stats have improved.
2017-05-16: Just pushed out version 1.3.5 of this script. It's made some slight changes to how the "win counts" (now "games with...") section of the table, moving the absolute counts to title attributes (i.e. hover over the percentage to see the ratio) and adding a new count of games with ≥25% of achievements available obtained.
2016-11-08: I've released version 1.2.0 of the script that introduces the ability to fetch the list of games within a sub, which should reduce the inaccuracy of some users statistics.
Comment has been collapsed.