IMHO, if you're going to give away a nice game that you want going to someone who will appreciate or "deserve" it (aka actually install it and play it), join groups like Playing Appreciated or Playing Matters.
Level doesn't matter when it comes to appreciating a nice gift. There are level 10s on this site who don't even play games and there are level 0's who will actually play it..
Comment has been collapsed.
Yea Tzaar I see your point. Problem is, you lock a lot of people out of your giveaways. I don't have the time to whitelist everyone who did a part to SG being SG, and if we all "hide" behind groups - it will be super akward for "newer" SG users to ever catch up with this "elite".
I see your point on the levels, yes - but the lvl 0 guys who would actually enjoy a game will never get a giveaway from me because 98% of the level 0 guys are just leeching.
Comment has been collapsed.
and if we all "hide" behind groups - it will be super akward for "newer" SG users to ever catch up with this "elite".
There's nothing elite about those two groups. The only requirement is that you play what you win. Level is irrelevant. You're already locking out 98% of SG by making your giveaway level 7.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm aware of that, and I know it doesn't stop with lvl 7 or even 10. That highlevel giveaway missed the target completly. ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
I know, I was simply trying to provide you with alternative "targets" who might appreciate that nice game more.
Comment has been collapsed.
Requirement to get into the Playing Appreciated group is either play one of the previous wins, or give away a game - that means it's either free or equals to level 1's requiement, only rule is to play wins within 30 days. Also there is nothing to catch up with :P
Comment has been collapsed.
You should stop caring about those stuff. This isn't a trading site, just give shit away and feel good doing it.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't want to sound rude dude, but what I care about should be my concern. I brought this topic up as a discussion.
My main criteria to filter giveaways is the level restriction, and if it's not working at all because of all the ways around it - I shouldn't care? Nope, that's too easy for me, won't give it up like that.
Comment has been collapsed.
I am LVL4 and I always thought I had it easy and fast. Sometimes I think people is going to blacklist me for being a lowquality member of the forums.
However, I think that what other people said it's true... At the end, level doesn't matter. There are people who would play the games despite the levels and people with hundreds of giveaways created whose only want the cards. So the level it's just an statistic at the end.
You make your own rules.
Comment has been collapsed.
Let em blacklist Silv, I don't care about that. They can't even enter your giveaways either, so on my part I guess they are loosing instead of winning something. :)
The level for me is the main criteria to "filter" giveaways (despite invite only or WL). If the level would be swapped as the main criteria with another stat like realcv given or >= 5 copies of XY given that would be awesome.
Comment has been collapsed.
I am sorry to say it this way BUT...
all the discussion will bring you only a lot of BL.
I brought up the same thing (maybe with harder words) and the people don't wanted to "loose" the big advantages from ALL $1 Bundles that are often given 5+ times away.
And as long as 1/3 work with that extreme cv farming (i take this number from my winners) will nothing change.
I got 30 BL and around 15 WL for bringing up that suggestion. Please tell me your endresult when it is over.
Die die damit pushen werden ALLES daran setzen zu verhindern das es geändert wird. Und wie du festgestellt hast sind es durchaus auch viele bekannte User die damit arbeiten.
Rechne dir selbst die Erfolgsaussichten aus.....
Open GA's ist schlicht Perlen vor die Säue werfen.
Und ohne BL kanst du invite only und auch Gruppen mittlerweile vergessen ODER du regst dich immer wieder über die gleichen Sachen auf.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't care about being blacklisted at all, because it works two ways. Those people I'm trying to reach with my giveaways won't even blacklist me for making this thread - if so, fine. I'm stating my opinion here and am open minded for a discussion so I don't mind getting a few BLs by leechers. In fact, I've been blacklisted yesterday more often than in the previous two years.
Comment has been collapsed.
The difference is that you made the point while being in a CV-group loop, Wieme isn't.
Also the whole being an ass thing. Which was the final nail from me.
Comment has been collapsed.
I am in a CV group loop ???? o_O what the heck is that?
Always interesting that others know more about me, groups i am into, my intentions and so on... then myself ... :-D (i am not sure if i should laughing or cry^^).
Ps.: Nail whatever is your cup of tea....
Comment has been collapsed.
Always interesting that others know more about me
Says the guy who is fond of judging others for the types and number of giveaways they make.
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh my judging is different to the one of others that don't like the $1 Bundle cv farming ? very interesting
Number of giveaways are not very important WHEN it is in a "ok" ratio to the wins. It is only a problem FOR ME when it is a extreme leeching. And with that view i am not alone too.
You are always a funny guy....
and can handle YOUR GA's/WL/BL(and whatever else) in any way you want .... BUT let other ones handle THERE GA's/WL/BL (and whatever else) how they want too
Comment has been collapsed.
I never said it was just you, and I've never once said "how to handle your giveaways." I'm commenting on how you speak to others on the forums -- in particular, those who don't meet "your standards" for giveaways. In that regard, I agree with Hassat.
I also find it a bit ironic that you now want the creator of a giveaway you won (Cooking Academy Fire and Knives) to get 0 CV for it -- a giveaway from that Dollar Viva Bundle you seem to dislike so much. Perhaps you should tell the giveaway creator you appreciate the win so much that you think he should get 0 CV for it.
Comment has been collapsed.
1) You and Hassat always agree on the things the other say....
2) I think you don't want understand my sentences. And i know i will make me work without hope that it will bring anything..... but because i am such a nice guy i try it again :o).
Giving away a $1 Bundle is not bad. Leftovers, a copy of the full bundle.. whatever.
But i see a lot that give all that cv farming bundles 5x+ away (the worst one was at 20 copies) and not only the Viva one.
I have not really big problems with them WHEN they give other stuff away too.
But the biggest part of this people don't give anything away that don't fits in the criteria of "extreme cv farming".
Wieme, as example, handle it much harder then i but he don't use BL for the "bad ones" when i remember me right.
I have a few that give $1 Bundles away (5 copies+) still in my WL ... but because they don't give only that stuff and because i know them longer/better/from other places then only sg.
Comment has been collapsed.
My point: Stop shitting on giveaway creators and appreciate the giveaways. You're not giving anything back to some of the people you win from anyway, since you don't make public giveaways.
Comment has been collapsed.
I proved again that you are not capable to discuss anything.
You put your partly absurdity sentences out and can't discuss when you get words against it. My deepest respect for such mature/adult behavior :-DDD.
My point:
It is complete uninteresting for me what you want that i do/how i should act that it "fits" for you.
You don't like me. And its the same from my side. A few people you like, a few you don't like... both are ok for me.
You want make only all the time trouble. Nothing better to do ?
My GA thread is open for nearly all and with a level 1 since the last bunch lvl 2 restriction, with a 0.5 real cv ratio, very little obstacles to jump into the GA's and for me lesser work because of the automatic checks for multiwins/don't activated. That to the "giving nothing back"
When you want feed the Autojoiners, Bots and extreme leecher do it but don't expect that all other ones want that too.
I prefer to give to real users that are give at least a bit back to the community. Because such people counts not leecher, exploiters and such people. Or which users did you think build up sg and let it run ? yeah for sure the ones with 400 wins and nothing given back to the community over years...
As a nice sideeffect you don't must run behind them that they take your gift, the "thanks" probability is much higher and all in all fewer times stress from anything.
Comment has been collapsed.
So much irony.
Go insult someone else. In point of fact, you've only proven my point (and Hassat's).
Also the whole being an ass thing. Which was the final nail from me.
Mhm.
Comment has been collapsed.
It is complete uninteresting for me what you want that i do/how i should act that it "fits" for you.
I'll be short: people have problems that you deny any kind of criticism towards yourself (you do what you want) but then condemn people who do their way (why they want to feed the autojoiners, why they are farming, why they are giving away what they are)
Decide how you want to act, because the "Don't tell me what to do while I tell you what to do" attitude is prime example of double standards and lack of integrity. I don't care if you care about it, but communication like that is what just stirs shit up on both sides while help no one.
Comment has been collapsed.
It is always the way of WHAT would be say and HOW.
From one that i don't like and that always brings up lies, half trues and absurdity sentences without the ability to discuss it is always only a throw out and finish "talk" i have problems to handle "criticism" (that can't be explained). His criticism is only because i am who i am. Not because of my opinions, a sentence or whatever. That is clearly showed in each "discussion" try. I don't want change myself for such people because i would brings nothing and so i don't give much on "what they want" I put his few followers in the same pot..
Did you take criticism from such people ? I don't think so.
I can handle criticism from people like you much better ;o)
A bis part is because you don't say
"... that you now want the creator of a giveaway you won (Cooking Academy Fire and Knives) to get 0 CV for it -- a giveaway from that Dollar Viva Bundle you seem to dislike so much. Perhaps you should tell the giveaway creator you appreciate the win so much that you think he should get 0 CV for it."
Such sentences have NOTHING to do with the reality and are only brought up to make trouble (or did really anyone think from such a sentence that this stuff are true?)
I showed my appreciate of the win with a, fast, thanks, fast activating and playing it in offline mode as my internet was away for weeks. i experienced that, a part, of the users don't know the word thanks
When he bring up such sentences that i don't appreciate it (that was not the first in that direction from him) i am not willing to hear on his rest of the sentences.
I think that is common and not only a special thing of me.
German people telled me, more then once, that they see my words in a other way then the ones that are native english speakers and that i use sometimes a not 100% fitting word and come harder over as i want to.
They say that a few ones always want see the "worst case possibility" in my sentences (the intention behind it) and should see it in a more relaxed way.
I think you misunderstood me when you write :
"I'll be short: people have problems that you deny any kind of criticism towards yourself (you do what you want) but then condemn people who do their way (why they want to feed the autojoiners, why they are farming, why they are giving away what they are)"
Because you see my words to Tzaar and his few followers as counting to all.
I think there is a big perception difference between us.
I changed things after users say anything (like my GA Thread rules).
- I have no problem when anyone handle his GA's in his way (like feeding autojoiners, giving away what they do) - but i want the right to say that i don't like it -all can say over my GA's how they like or dislike it too.. that is no problem for me- (a discussion over anything can bring good things...., don't talking about it can't bring good results -maybe "only" a better understanding but always a advantage for the community-)
- AND the possibility to open MY GA's to the group(s)/parts of people that i, and all other GA creators, want to. As example to the ones that give much, to the ones that play there wins, to the people that don't push there cv with each $1 Bundle, to the ones that solve jigidis and so on.
And at the moment it give NO WAY to exclude the cv extreme farmers.
So this suggestion came (again) up. This time from wieme.
I am on double so much Whitelists then Blacklists despite my not always common opinions. I think that would not happen when i am really a "asshole" or "bad" and i can see from the date of WL/BL entries if i made only GA's or make any discussions.
I hope that, at least partly, make my acting more reasonable :)
Comment has been collapsed.
If anything were to be done about this, then I think the simplest solution would be to change the threshold of 'free', to mean any game with a discount of > 99% (or even 99.5%).
However, how big a problem is this? Looking at the site stats, fewer than 1% of people are Level 5 or over, and at least those are contributing to this site. If you have specific rules about what makes someone 'deserving' of your gift, then, yes, sgtools is your best option.
Comment has been collapsed.
I've a different opinion on this. The levelsystem is used as the main criteria to qualify for giveaways, and the way it is gamed is not good for the level economics. Sure I could do WL giveaways and group only giveaways that would block a lot of users from the get go. But this is not what I'm expecting of a functional levelsystem.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't disagree that the level system is open to abuse from these cheap bundles. But it was already possible to buy games for pennies from sites like DIG and SteamGround. Perhaps Fanatical being a more prominent and trusted site has just exacerbated the situation.
Also, I don't think that having a higher level automatically makes someone more worthy (which is very subjective) of receiving a game. For example, there are leachers and rule breakers at all levels - there have been permanent suspensions for level 10 users for using autojoin scripts and multiple accounts.
I prefer to gift to groups and privately on the forum, though if I win from a public GA I will always make a reciprocal public GA. I suppose you could argue that this is a symptom of the 'non-functional' level system.
Comment has been collapsed.
The problem is very big from my view because you can't use at sg or sgtools a filter that block the ones that gave game XYZ 5x+ out.
You can set a minimum Level.
Let us say lvl 2 to avoid the worst autojoiners and extreme leechers. With ONE 1$ Bundle (the last one gave 62,5 CV) you are over that.
Ok then you think, take a higher level. Lets say 4. With THREE or FOUR $1 Bundles you are over it.
With only the last $1 Bundle you can reach lvl 5 or 6 without problems. And yes it demotivates, as example, me to give away good (bundled) games and let me think over trading the good ones and give "crap" away.
And with each higher level restrictions you close out more and more users that give. Not bad stuff, maybe not less stuff.... only because they don't give "pushed" (at the cv farming) bundles/games away and that should be more a quality sign and don't should be "punished" with a lower cv counting OR the extrem cv farmer -system exploiter- should not be rewarded SO HIGH for giving away all the $1 Bundles....
It give no possibilities to split in "wanted/unwanted" users from there GA's.
You can't BL all the ones that use the extreme farming. The BL is not big enough and it is unrealistic that a lot would make themself so much work .... before they make themself that work they stop giving away the good games that don't bring much cv and will give nothing or the $1 Bundles too like so many others....
In my eyes it can't be the wanted result of no gifting or only the $1 (cv farming) Stuff wanted by this site and the community, because i think the site dies more and more with such "possibilities"
From my winners in group GAs and over my invite only Thread (lvl restriction 1 or since the last batch 2 and with a 0.5 real cv ratio protection) are around 1/3 big cv farmers. For me is that number a "shock". And yes i don't want that the ones that only spend $5 when you check there steam profiles you see at ALL of them that they have 1k games+, newest AAA titles and so on. I NEVER found a poor one that make such a cv farming with 5 copies+ get all the good games from me. I had a complete different intention with my Giveaway thread.
Comment has been collapsed.
I understand your dilemma, but I (presumably) the goal of SG is to provide people a way to giveaway their spare games, and earn a little reward (CV) in the meantime.
As you have pointed out, there are mechanisms to achieve what you want. You can use groups, or sgtools. You can use your whitelist and recruit individual users that meet your own criteria - but that is obviously very time consuming. For example, I thought I had a good ratio, but was not selected for a whitelist giveaway because my ratio of GAs to groups was too high. This was the GA creators' rule, and I total repect them for that.
The thing is, CV has, and never has had (to my knowledge - I wasn't an SG v1.0 user), any bearing on quality. Would bundled vs. unbundled be a better indicator?
Comment has been collapsed.
bundled vs unbundled is even worse than CV imo, because inflated CV may overvalue bad games in number of giveaways, but being bundled devalues the good ones. Like so many people said that they don't buy bundled games for giveaways because of less CV, even if they are levels where CV is meaningless.
The site would net more of good quality giveaways, than if we very strictly would hold up the "hard to level up and CV is important" approach.
Comment has been collapsed.
The biggest problem of all is that there is no perfect system that absolutely no one will ever exploit.
Worrying too much over CV in -either- direction (yours or someone else's) is a mistake on this site anyway, truthfully. I think most of us have been there before at least once but really the attitude should be: enter what I want to win, give what I can, and don't stress the rest. You can also hide the things you never want to see again, blacklist for any reason you see fit, etc.
Are there people who will abuse the system, break rules or try to take advantage in some way? Absolutely. But no ruleset will change that.
I have very little disposable income per month and I still am about 80% more likely to buy a bundle now than I was before because I know I can do something nice with the items in the bundle that I -don't- want, and there's always at least a few.
Since joining SG the amount I have spent on games has skyrocketed. And it would probably be even more than it is now if gifting through the steam store wasn't a nightmare. I make giveaways because I enjoy it and my CV has naturally risen. Giving solely to be greedy and raise levels is probably going to be a disappointing time anyway, because there are fewer and fewer GAs made at the highest levels, and the would-be exploiters are not going to find the endless pages of 60 dollar games they're imagining as their motivation.
There are also many games that were free -once- but aren't anymore, that I would love a chance to win because I missed out on the offer. I can't buy every bundle either, so other people posting extra copies is not a problem at all in my opinion regardless of the price point. I'd take a 7x rebundled "cheap" HOG, roguelike or RPG that I don't own, over CAPLOCKSBATTLEROYALE, or 90% of the other most wanted games that I have hidden. If this site got to the point that everything other than AAA pricepoint games were frowned upon by the community in terms of giveaways, I'd permanently have less than a single page of giveaways to join.
Trying to establish "worth" outside bundled/nonbundled is just too arbitrary, because it all comes down to what the individual is interested in.
And things like Clickteam Fusion couldn't be used to farm CV unless some people were interested in it enough to enter the giveaways made, regardless of their reasons for entering. The creator got lots of CV but the winner got something in return that they opted in to receive.
That all said, I do see your point of view and why you feel this way. I also fully support the whole "your giveaway, your rules" train of thought. And I hope there's some metric you can use to solve the problem. I can understand frustration towards some things, or find certain behaviors distasteful but I just don't think overhauling the entire system is the solution. Reduced CV for bundled games is already in place and I think that's all that's needed. Hopefully some SGTools filtering can fill the gap between what's outlined in the rules, and your preferences.
Comment has been collapsed.
Wow, I really like your thoughts here.
I know there probably isn't THE solution, as other experienced members have stated, but from my point of view the actual system is lacking.
Personally I'm not a fan of blacklisting. I got like 30 peeps on the list, those contributed like 2 games and got 100 out of the system. Or were absolut asses in the forums, like whining about a duped key when they themselves never gave one.
Too be clear haedaeso - I don't mind people giving away bundled spare keys or the bundle one time itself. It happens, I did that when I came here too. What I mind is people spamming bundles which give craploads of CV. They are not being nice - they are exploiting the system. No one is giving "for the nice community" with a dolly bundle everyone would be able to buy themself (it's not like it was a flashsale with the Viva thing).
I'm not giving away to level up anymore, I did that when I was on the bottom of the level list. Now I enjoy giving games people really want to play, my problem is, the level criteria to filter isn't working well to find my audience. Yea, I know, groups WL and stuff. But it just doesn't feel natural to shut so many people out.
I also admit I check my games before buying them if they get full CV. Which is sad, because there are tons of games out there I'd like to giveaway but they have been bundled somewhere in the past. I'm sure I'm not the only one doing this, but maybe I would spent 10$ for getting 3.6 CV (30P game) when others spent 5$ to get 300 CV.
Comment has been collapsed.
I've never given more than 1 copy of any entire bundle myself, but I have bought 2 copies of full bundles before — one for items I want and one to give away in full. The end result is 2 copies of some games I either own or have no interest in, being given away. And I know that there are many would-be exploiters who are greedy in their motivations and means. It would be naive and unrealistic to think otherwise, and I get that.
Since I have personally never given away many copies of the exact same thing, maybe I shouldn't have a voice here but I can understand only having 5 dollars to spend, at all, and deciding to buy 5 copies of a $1 bundle with 20 games each because you can theoretically give something to 100 different people instead of 1 $5 item to a single person. Is that going to be every gifter's motivation? No, sadly. But anything this cheap is going to be hit with reduced CV. On top of that, once you give too many copies of the same thing away, the earned value plummets even further.
And there have been times I couldn't afford a 1$ bundle. Believe it or not, if one came out today, I couldn't buy it no matter what was in it. I'm at my limit. Actually, I went a little over my limit because of bundlefest and I can't buy a single disposable thing for 3 weeks. It happens. You may see giveaways from me in this timeframe because I have spare keys, and my mom bought me a year's sub to humble bundle for christmas, but you won't see anything purchased new from me for a while because I can't afford it. If a $1 bundle was released with things I want I'd be thankful to see chances to win it all over the site. If not, I'd just hide the games.
Recently free games? I'd love Fortified for example, but I missed the last stamp. Not too long ago fanaticalstars gave away Lethal League. Someone commented on the steam group post that they really wanted it but they couldn't get a copy because of their region not letting them claim it. I didn't know this person but I went and got a copy and gave him the key because he seemed a decent fellow, but by this example, I could have given it away here while it was actively free and allowed people to get the game that couldn't have otherwise.
My point is, you simply can't know what the financial means or intentions of others are. There are leechers and schemers and rulebreakers around by the hundreds, but having the attitude that every single person who does x must be y, is unfair. But this brings up other points too, outside of easily targeted bundles from the sites we all know. What about those who buy 50 copies of a certain game because they could get it for 6 cents a copy on some Russian game site? Price glitches? Times when a game is oddly 96 to 100% off on amazon but full price everywhere else? Regifting from won raffles on other sites? And what about those sites that will remain unnamed where you get site based currency for tasks that you can use to buy "free" games? Is there inherent value in their loss of free time to do this (which is the same idea as labor for actual money), or is it worthless because there was no monetary exchange?
I'm not trying to argue or sound unpleasant — anything but honestly — but I know tone can be hard to relay through text. I see your points and why but in the end I think you're just adding unnecessary stress in your life over something that's not so important anyway. The true spirit of steamgifts is to enjoy giving things away and sometimes winning something nice too. The people that try to game the system to their own benefit are missing out anyway, as there are less and less giveaways at higher levels (and it seems to me that 90% of the things I'm most interested in are almost always level 2 or 3 since most folks don't want to shut too many people out from a chance to win.) I don't think I have ever had a situation where I've thought "Oh wow, this shiny new release that's super expensive that I won! Haha, I'm so glad I'm level 7!"
I think the biggest difference between us, is that you're currently feeling a bit cynical towards the system and I'm probably guilty of having too much good faith in others. But I have felt cynical before and I have had a couple of situations with winners that have outright pissed me off, if I'm perfectly honest. Most of us probably have experienced a wide variety of things here since there are so many people. If there's any advice I can give you that's worth anything other than hot air, is please don't let a few honestly rotten eggs ruin your time here.
And for what it's worth, here's a whitelist.
Comment has been collapsed.
I agree with pretty much everything you posted haedaeso. Thank you for sharing your thoughts.
I have hesitated to add my thoughts to the discussion for fear of being judged or rejected but so be it. Live and let live.
When I saw the viva bundle I thought, what a great bundle for the value. Most of the games (save a handful) looked interesting to me (I saved a key for each of those for myself) and based on the reviews I figured others would be interested as well. I have joined giveaways in the past with 5 copies, 10 copies or more and whether the giver's intention was to farm cv or not I was happy for the increased chance of winning. I wanted to provide that opportunity for others and this bundle allowed me to do that with a lot of decently reviewed games. I have done that with one or two other bundles but seeing as that may be frowned upon I may stop in the future.
Even though cv is less after 5+ copies I was surprised at how much that bundle boosted my cv. It wasn't my intention to abuse the system. I figured the reduced cv for multiple copies was in place to prevent such abuse. I would be fine if that was adjusted as some have pointed out the current system for reduced cv for multiple copies may not have been designed to handle bundles like these.
I have been tempted to buy other bundles in the past that offered a high return in cv but decided against it because I was not interested in any of the games and they seemed to mostly be shovelware based on various indicators and reviews. I buy bundles when they have games I am interested in and was happy to find sg to be able to have the games I wasn't interested in go to someone that might appreciate them.
Despite how long the named bundle in question was for sale, I'm sure not everybody knew about it or had the chance they wanted to get it as it has happened to me in the past with other bundles and promotions. There are so many games and so many bundles now-a-days it's hard to even try to keep track of and decide on what one may want. I am glad people still give away free (no cv) games as I might have missed the promotion and it may be a game I am interested in--this is why I do the same.
I will say that all of the responses I received to the giveaways I made from that bundle were positive and I received some genuine thanks from people that missed out on the bundle; even for the games that I wasn't interested in or didn't think had much value (worth playing). I did try to break up the giveaways into various themed trains with polls and such and hoped that in so doing I might add something fun or humorous to someone's day.
There are a number of games I have keys that I paid for in the past but will give no cv because they have been given away for free since I got them. This is due to the fact that I was buying bundles long before I knew about sg. Of course I need to do the work of sorting through all those old bundles and all that entails, just another backlog to deal with... but I digress.
It does sound like the current system could use some adjustments to better handle unfairly leveling up with bundles like these, especially in the lower half of the current levels.
wieme, I must say I was saddened to find out I was no longer on your whitelist but I completely understand, no hard feelings. In fact, it may have been my saddest day on sg here and not because your giveaways are so awesome (although of course, I did look forward to them), but because of the kindness and belonging I felt in your responses to all those who commented on your giveaways--thank you for that.
Comment has been collapsed.
"I have hesitated to add my thoughts to the discussion for fear of being judged or rejected but so be it."
That's probably the most relatable comment I've ever read on a discussion and why I'm mostly quiet on every site I'm a member of. I'm disabled and have social anxiety so I have to worry and overthink everything on the basis of "do I have the energy and ability to keep up with this if something goes south" and the answer is usually "no". Steamgifts is one of the only places I've come out of my shell at all, on.
I also worry about the fact I can't say anything without writing a book. Since I had to switch over from typing to dictation, something in my mind changed and talking instead of writing somehow makes every thought take up 500% more space and I can't seem to reel it in. Though I know its a huge issue, I try but everything I say is TL:DR. Lol. I'm sorry to everyone that has to put up with me.
Ahem, anyway. I agree with you here on just about everything (and the OP too, has some great points) but there really doesn't seem to be an easy solution that doesn't micromanage everything to hell because there are just far too many variables.
I hope you have a nice day, and I'm glad you spoke up even if you were shy to do so because I enjoyed your point of view and your nice comments made me feel less anxious about my own post. Also, here's a whitelist.
Comment has been collapsed.
I've been blacklisted more than in 2 years since yesterday - I don't care because anyone I'd like to reach with my giveaways wouldn't BL me for bringing this topic up. :)
Comment has been collapsed.
I see your point but at the same time, if people also make other GAs besides the trash bundles, it's fine with me. It's not really as if leveling up gave a huge advantage unless you're level 8 to 10.
And even with trash bundles available, I keep seeing leeches win GA after GA without having given one game. It's all good. Karma will take care of everyone in the end. I'm just glad the community exists, regardless
Comment has been collapsed.
Sure, I'm also glad that SG exists but that doesn't mean we could work on it to be even better and a fairer place.
I'm criticizing the level- / CV-system for what it is right now, that's the point I wanna make.
Comment has been collapsed.
And you made your point well. I wasn't criticizing your post btw, I was just bitching about leeches so I made a point of finding a silver lining.
Comment has been collapsed.
TIL of those bundles. Doesn't surprise me such behavior considering most people in here seem to have hidden agendas.
Comment has been collapsed.
You are doing your part for the community lay, welcome to my WL.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thank you wieme, i appreciate the kindness and returned the favor. Just need to gather more people until i do whitelisted giveaways. Once again, thank you
Comment has been collapsed.
I wasn't going to, but in the end gave away 2 copies of that bundle because PayPal had given me $2 which I needed to spend on something before it expired, the few titles which had cards would likely give more than $1 in wallet credit each for me and my wife's account, and finally because there were still loads of people entering for them... I don't want to create GAs for games which people really don't want, but if there have already been hundreds of GAs and are still lots of people entering every GA, I'm not opposed to giving away something I personally wouldn't dream of playing.
That said, I do think that it would make much more sense for a 99% discounted game to be treated the same as a 100% discounted game! I would also prefer the levels to be a little more meaningful.
Comment has been collapsed.
Hey Ape. Appreciated that your discussing the topic. :)
I understand your point of view and your reasoning behind it. I don't mind giving away games I wouldn't play at all, too (Mr. Shifty is a great example).
Liking your proposal about the "free" thing. Maybe it could be 2.25% someone said - 15% of 15%.
Comment has been collapsed.
can someone explain to me how all these bundle are so cheap on fanatical?
Comment has been collapsed.
not the viva dollar one, they have plenty of other game like shadow or mordor, fairy fencer bundle ect
Comment has been collapsed.
Good contacts?
Bundlestars/Fanatical always was the number #2 in quality after Humble Bundle.
Comment has been collapsed.
On Fanatical specifically, because those games have already been bundled multiple times and have lost most of their direct sale market value. Bundling is a way to squeeze a few more pennies out of them.
This is different from the cheap bundles on sites like Go Go and Otaku, where the games are already cheap and mostly junk, so the low pricing is the only way those games would ever sell.
One more time:
Cheap Bundles on a Quality Site: The games have usually been overbundled and have lost market value, even if the games are good.
Cheap Bundles on a Low-Quality Site: The games are usually crap and can't sell without being bundled cheaply.
Comment has been collapsed.
If the won CV would be substracted from the send CV to determine Level, the problem you are observing could be regulated to a certain degree on its own.
Simple because people would automatically start to be more mindfull in "spending" their achieved levels on CV "abusing" games.
Not only that they would most likely be more mindfull in what GA they join in generell.
If also a negatiive Level would be introduced up to Level 10 with the same values as the current ones you would be able to address the people you want to reach. So a Level 0 Giveaway would mean you can reach every new user alongside everyone who is in the positives. Going further down you could still reach every new user and include people that are in a negative range you seem acceptable.
You would finally had the possibilitie to reach new users without feeding every "extreme leecher" out there.
Comment has been collapsed.
You create another problem by doing so. I understand that not everyone is able to contribute in a 1:3 ratio won/sent like I do. There's nothing wrong with winning more then you contributed if it's not something like 50:1 to me.
The last option seems cool, that's kinda what I'm looking for. But sent / won ratio is to simple. Should be some "real cv sent / won" thing.
Comment has been collapsed.
Since the Level is based on real CV anyway i did not pointed that out especially. I thought it would be obvious that i mean real CV as well ;).
There is nothing wrong with peoples win more then they contribute.
After all for anyone in the positive there must be a equal one in the negative too.
Can you please elaborate what you mean by "You create another problem by doing so"
In my perception it wont solve the current situation completely, only adresses some drawbacks of the current situation.
But i fail to see that there would be a completely new problem created by doing so, besides the Drama that will happen when levels drop of course.
That could possible be circumvated by leaving the current Level as it is and introduce a dynamic level alongside which do the thing that is mentioned above and can be used as filter during GA Creation.
Comment has been collapsed.
Sorry for the late reply Matwyn, I lost track. :)
I'm not quite sure if I understood your idea right - but you basically say if you don't contribute, you can't win? Or you stay on level zero forever. Mh. Like a dynamic system - but what if those people spam bundle keys to put the "sent CV" back up? You would need to overhaul that regardlessly, if I understand correctly, not quite sure, as said.
Comment has been collapsed.
Currently the Levels are a one way Ticket if you reach a Level you stay there (not considering price changes).
So people complain someone abuses the system to raise his level.
But if the Level would be a two way ticket it would also mean that for each CV earned another one gets a reduction in CV.
So if there would be interest in a game someone would get a reduction in his CV for every CV earned so “abusing the system” would even itself out to a certain extend.
I am not saying that you will be level 0 forever more like you start at 0 and then go either up or down up to 10 Levels. And this Level would be dynamic.
And i am also not saying that a -Level is a bad thing.
For example looking at the first 100 entries of your Frostpunk GA the following Level entrants are present:
17x 10; 9x 9; 19x 8; 51x 4 and 4x 6
Would the Level be dynamic and Range from -10 (-5000 CV) to 10 (+5000 CV) the following Level entrants would be present:
1x 10; 4x 9; 6x 8; 20x 7; 21x 6; 12x 5; 9x 4; 4x 3; 1x 2; 1x -1; 1x -3; 2x -4; 4x -5 ; 5x -6; 5x -7; 2x -8; 1x -9; 1x -10
Comment has been collapsed.
To me regardless of how much CV you give, the more wins you have, the less you should win. So personally I'd prefer that CV is ditched and replaced with something that gives a higher chance to those who haven't won much.
Want another possible criterion? Reward people by the number of entrants in their giveaways. The wider the audience and the more wanted the game, the more 'CV' the creator would get.
Speaking for myself, with my giveaways I'd always like to give something to the active, giving members of SG. This users are making this site what it is. A nice place to win games, talk about games and share games with people (if you want to of course).
Speaking for myself, I think that there are users who give a lot and add little to the site, and users who don't give as much but have a nice presence and add to the site. This site isn't that nice a place, and that's in large part because people are constantly being judged by how much they give and win (as well as for other things, since blacklists and whitelists were introduced).
Comment has been collapsed.
Wow, ET3D I somehow completly overlooked your comment. Sorry on that!
I really like your "less won - better chances" approach. :)
The more entrants thing also sounds incredibly cool, but I think every giveaway would be like 4 weeks and lvl 0 - so bots are everywhere and levels wouldn't matter anymore.
I disagree with you on the this site isn't that nice. If you stick to the right people it certainly is a cool way to go.
Comment has been collapsed.
If everyone would make public level 0+ giveaways, there would be no problem about the cv boosting. ;P
Comment has been collapsed.
Right. That would also be the dream of every botuser that never contributed even a single buck to the site.
Comment has been collapsed.
Let CG deal with the bots. How much a person contributes to the site (in terms of CV) is a bad criterion for a giveaway site. It's a fine criterion for a random trading site, which is what SG basically is, but it would be better that SG should stop pretending that it's a giveaway site. Just codify random trading, and it would likely work out much better for current uses than giveaways do, and satisfy most users. Those wanting to actually be charitable could start another site.
Comment has been collapsed.
for me its just a way to get rid of some of the bots
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't think it's really that much an issue. Despite doomsaying in the release topic, it also contained stats that levels 1-5 raised by around a few hundred, while lvl 0 raised in the same time by 10.000.
Giving ANYTHING at all really isn't the majority, so I don't think we should take excessive punishments for those who do.
And if I do see people exploiting this, I just use the tried and true method of blacklisting.
Comment has been collapsed.
The bundle has been held back by a lot of people though, they weren't all created in the month the bundle was released.
But you are right, maybe I should use more blacklisting. :/
Comment has been collapsed.
This feels like talking about politics... what ever you say, you can be sure you will get someones bad side for sure.
First of all, yeah there are lot of differences in the old and new system and there for sure are a lot of people who use SG the one or the other way.
Overall those who have been here and fought up their way to higher levels with the old system did it for some reason and they tried their best in any perspective. Either to get their CV high enough or make more ppl happy. Pointing it out in this kind of manner rather makes me feel sad about those, who really do care about giving away (regardless the money). You will never be able to reach the prefect system anyway, so you either make it unappealing like **** so those who really get the basic idea behind it stay or simply let it run the way it is.
Let's go to the extreme:
Simply adjust the CV based on the highest discount ever. No problem with bundles and unfair treatments. This way people will still have their dupes to spare, but those who want to share the games they like will do so anyway, if it is a trash bundle or not. There shouldn't be big of a problem with this, as long as the only aim here wasn't achieving a high level for whatever reason. Since SG used to be about gifting things, the money spent shouldn't be the problem here either. Less work to deal with and enough of those life is so unfair topics. Life has always been unfair and those who manage to get buy with the easy way... yeah they do exist. Why using the street around the hill, if you can go straight for the apple tree downhill? This is less a topic how to adjust the system rather how to fix ppl. brains to work in way, that you would call it fair and square.
I personally do give away most of my games to friends I met here or rl friends, that simply can't afford even a few games. Sometimes even a free acquired game makes them more happy, than most reactions you can expect here. (I am not the best in saying thank you myself, but I at least do write something in the end.)
I am sure almost anyone here is going to have something hidden he/she did and does or still doesn't realize it. (This includes me as well)
And reading about GA groups as option, half of the last one I really went all out in ended up on the blacklist for not checking, if they own a game, if it's a compilation. Not even an oversize warning and -blacklist counter- in the description could prevent this insanity -.-
It really is funny to see many of them take part in this discussion here :)
In the end it is up to yourself, if you can deal with this circumstances or not. You do have a lot of ways to address the games to (the correct) ppl., but if I remember right, the basic idea was to share them anyway. There have always been ppl. with more money or a better location to get games cheaper. Unfair yeah, but still this is how it works. I do still have several games I can't even activate since they have been indexed in my country 20 years ago -.-
But looking at all of this, SG offers way more than a maybe lil bit outdated CV system. If ppl. aim for that, yeah let them. But you can read tons of different stuff here, learn about new games or free games, make new friends and build up new groups with ppl. from all over the world. Maybe simply find a topic that offers you a bunch of people playing an old or non popular game you used to have to play alone. I even found a streamer here, I am currently modding for...well as far as I can currently afford time wise.
Things do change and putting hope into a situation, where someone might thank you years later for a game he won here rarely occur. If one thing never changes, it is the greed and laziness of ppl. you have to deal with.
Comment has been collapsed.
Bento, sorry for the ultra late reply. I overlooked your comment, just like the one from ET3D.
I appreciate your comment and your thoughts you put into it. I perfectly understand your point of view.
You are right about the new games and stuff, I'm glad for that. Thanks for your post once again!
Comment has been collapsed.
No problem at all. This is about sharing your thoughts and let ppl. take part in the process. Seems like I did not to bad since I just got +1 to my blacklist. Even though... I would have appreciated any kind of bad tempered comment regarding that matter. Non the less, there are at least two persons who read this wall of text ^^
Thanks for the ultra late reply :D
Comment has been collapsed.
Yet another topic of ... let me complain about people giving away stuff and getting ... well nothing in return really .
Comment has been collapsed.
Wait - I'm not complaining about them giving them away. I'm complaining about them getting a way too big of a reward (craploads of CV) for it. If value was reduced after giving away the bundle one time - hell they could buy hundreds of that bundle and give them away if people would still enter for it.
Comment has been collapsed.
I tried to give a thought to the "unfair CV" problem and a couple things came up to me.
One of the main problems with low value/high CV bundles is that what they do to the "CV economy" is permanent. To mitigate this one could think of the SG CV as a real curriculum vitae: if you worked as a rocket scientist 20 years ago but in the next years you just sat on your ass probably your CV won't be as much valuable as someone who's still in the field. You could replicate this "effect" (and I say this to my detriment 'cause I'm a pretty lazy giver) by adding a formula that progressively diminishes the amount of points earned for a giveaway as time passes. This way if a cheap bundle comes up there will be a temporary CV boost, but at least the effect won't be permanent.
Another idea could be completely rethinking the way a game adds CV. Right now store price is the main factor, with a "bundled" modifier that reduces the value considerably on certain occasions. If a more complex way was used that factored in wishlists, reviews, lowest price, times bundled, last seen bundled, number of giveaways active/overall, etc. maybe a more accurate representation of the real value of a game could be used to determine the amount of CV a giveaway should give. If it ends up being a good approximation it could even become the new standard of evaluating games in the trading market.
Anyway, it's hard to come up with a fair solution, I tried to give some insight, and I'm not even really convinced it's good, please don't hate me :p
Comment has been collapsed.
Damn th4, you are the third post in a row I seem to have missed. Thanks for your comment!
I also thought about a system where there might be a CV bonus or minus for the amount of giveaways a game has gotten (in the last few weeks or months, or so). That would be some dynamic system, but I guess everyone would just sit and wait with those bundlekeys.
Comment has been collapsed.
Hey, don't worry :) I was actually trying to write a formula and test it against some sample giveawys but then got lazy and forgot about it >.<
Anyway the gist of it was trying to give a formal definition of all the considerations a trader goes through when evaluating a game and coming up with an arbitrary number that represents a game's absolute value.
The matter is the data to consider is probably not all available using public APIs so even if one finds out a good formula it might be very hard to implement :p
Comment has been collapsed.
As of now I'll probably consider joining more groups or making one on my own, so people will indeed apply to it and accepting "my" rules.
The highlevel Frostpunk didn't hit the target either, above 1k entries and roughly 60 comments. A pitty. :)
Comment has been collapsed.
Commenting on giveaways is quite down since we get notifications about it :D previously people spammed it (and some do it even today) with the same messages with scripts. Times change.
Comment has been collapsed.
Generic comments such as 'thanks' even if they are genuine are often considered spam by some users and some people go as far as calling all the users bots. Most people don't comment and they don't have to. Sometimes people just find interaction difficult, others are trying to avoid blacklists or simply can't think of much to say. Thanking someone once you have won and received the gift makes sense of course.
Comment has been collapsed.
^ I tend to agree with that. Even if it's specified sometimes by the giveaway creator, you never know if your thanks message will be well received or not. This being said, when it's about WL giveaways, I normally always leave a message in the GA. And always after winning too.
I'd only disagree wit the "people who find interaction difficult". I mean... if they can accept a gift from some stranger but they can't say thanks, it seems a pretty convenient way to have communication issues :p
Comment has been collapsed.
I recently cleared my whitelist off of people that used the "Viva Dollar Bundle" (1$ spent = 62 CV) more than one time.
I think it also applies to some people who used it just once :p Or maybe you noticed I didn't meet other criterias as well.
Anyway, not complaining at all. As someone stated before in this post : your giveaways, your money, your rules. Especially when you're giving so much full value ones.
Now about the topic, I'm not in your shoes and honestly I don't think most of the posters here are.
Groups as presented before on this topic seem to be a not-perfect-but-still-correct solution, but not anyone can play within a month. I know there are some games from my SG backlog i really want to and definitely will play, but I won them several months ago , and I don't think I'm the only one in this situation. But once again, there is no perfect solution, reading all the replies here is a good way to realize it ^^
Hope you'll find one/one will appear soon that makes you happier with feedback & appreciation of your gifts.
Comment has been collapsed.
I've been on this site for years but I'm not actually sure what you mean by CV, those specific initials.
As for the question itself I feel the same a lot of the time. I like giving stuff away, hopefully the people who win really want to enjoy something I have no interest in. The majority of my giveaways have been bundles games but I've also done it almost 700 times.
I didn't realise you could get to level 4 so easily, I used to limit my "better" giveaways to 2 =p
I'm not sure what the answer is. I'm not a fan of people who get to a certain level with a few high point bundled games and then just sit there giving nothing back. I'd feel bad if my giveaways won exceed my giveaways made.
Limiting CV...Contributor Level! I'm a genius, limiting that to one per bundle is an interesting idea but I'm not sure how feasible that is. Is it simply a case of Game X is worth 10 points and then worth 1 from then on? Or would it be if multiple games are given away around the same time that were in a bundle? Is there a time limit on that? I mean someone might get Game X from a bundle and then a year later buy it for £40 and give it away, how much is it worth then?
Never really looked into SGTools, it seems to have more rules for giveaways, would SG implementing some of those rather than them being tied to an external site help do you think?
Comment has been collapsed.
Pretty sure CV is cash value, or the amount of cash value SG assigns for your giveaway.
Comment has been collapsed.
Ah yes, I saw Contributor on my user page and thought that's what it was but that says Contributor Level. I'm not a genius! :P
Comment has been collapsed.
CV is contributor value. Just mouseover the bracket with won / sent gifts.
Comment has been collapsed.
Wow, I had no idea that a $1 bundle could give so much CV. I really don't follow these things at all, and never thought to buy a $1 bundle to give away - since for me the idea of giving on SG is being generous, at it seems like almost everyone could find a $1 to buy the bundle if they wanted it. But the idea of getting to level 4 for $2 seems crazy - and trivializes the time, effort, and expense it costs to reach that same milestone without exploiting such bundles.
I think you're definitely onto a problem that's a clear negative for SG. It at once devalues levels while at the same time spams the site with disappointing giveaways.
Perhaps there should be an additional metric added:
Full value giveaways - 100% CV
Bundle giveaways - 15% CV
$1 bundle giveaways - 2.5% CV
Free giveaways - 0% CV
This would maintain CV for $1 bundles, since they still do cost money and should thus have a CV reward, but bring it more in line with the CV per $ rate of regular bundles (I think - I don't really follow these things, and not sure how much CV a standard Humble Bundle gives).
Comment has been collapsed.
Problem with the 15% CV also persists. I have no solution for it, but if you buy a game for real money today, that has been bundled before and you only get 15% CV for it, I'm usually just picking games that weren't bundled and pay the price for them because I will get the "real" CV in the end. Personally I think that this does also hold back a lot of giveaways for previously bundled games because if you decide to spent money - then you want to spent it well, don't ya?
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm usually just picking games that weren't bundled and pay the price for them because I will get the "real" CV in the end. Personally I think that this does also hold back a lot of giveaways for previously bundled games because if you decide to spent money - then you want to spent it well, don't ya?
Well, you can do it, if you're not interested in levels / CV anymore.. but for me at levels 3-8 this was definitely a reason for the games selection of special GAs (WL or celebratory; besides of trains with quality and quantity..).
Comment has been collapsed.
Hey SG community,
This topic has bothering me since my 10 years on steam celebration thread, so here we go.
I recently cleared my whitelist off of people that used the "Viva Dollar Bundle" (1$ spent = 62 CV) more than one time.
The main reason I have for this is this:
If you only gave the bundle away two times, you'd already be on SG level 4.
This completely destroys the economic of the levelsystem on SG, since the levels 1,2 and 3 (3 = 50 CV) are basically useless.
I mean, you could even get to level 5 with only spending five bucks if you'd carry it to extremes.
Speaking for myself, with my giveaways I'd always like to give something to the active, giving members of SG.
This users are making this site what it is. A nice place to win games, talk about games and share games with people (if you want to of course).
Nobody is forced to giveaway, I understand that. But are we really willing to live with a levelsystem as a criteria like this?
What about all those people on lvl 4-5 that spent maybe hundreds of bucks for that level and now share the same chance of winning a giveaway for lvl 4-5 with those peeps who invested 5 bucks to climb the ladder?
This isn't a problem for the "mid levels" only though, as you find tons of people on higher levels (like mine, 7+) that spammed the bundle aswell.
I decided to make Frostpunk a lvl 7+ giveaway - what for I wonder, it just doesn't reach the right recipients IMO.
I'm down for whitelist giveaways but to be honest I'd like to be able to give away to unknown users (outside of closed groups) aswell, such as invite only gibs in the discussions.
But the level criteria is completly useless as a standalone filter as of now. I could use the blacklist also, but that's not what I want to do, as it is a lot of spotting to do.
I know about tools like SGtools and stuff to set rules by myself, but is this really the way it should be handled? With an extension?
Also, the lovely talgaby stated in this thread that the won / sent ratio doesn't really cut it. You could have sent 500 games with a crapload of $bundled stuff and received only 50 AAA titles. Seems impressive - it is not.
We could keep the level system as it is, but I would need another filter / criteria to weed out the people who boosted their cvs massively.
Reduce the CV for $bundles after 1 time given away maybe? Maybe an "full / reduced / no value" given ratio?
Open discussion for everyone I guess, as I got no real "this is the way to go" solution atm.
TL;DR:
The levelsystem as it is now is, mostly on the lower ranks completly unbalanced and not a criteria you can use sensible.
Update 29th June: You can buy yourself to lvl 6 if you spent 10$ as of now. GG.
Comment has been collapsed.