you failed at thinking, so look at OP profile and try again.
He just pointed out absurd of this game being added to bundle list while so many others more exploitable haven't. And you instantly assume, without any proofs that he just wants to farm CV to win more games (what he in fact doesn't need to) and call him out.
Comment has been collapsed.
most of the users here are just angry about the fact that they are inconsistent with the bundle list.
you can find so many examples in this topic of games which aren't added to the list.
So either remove the bundle list complete or make a clear rule and add all games to the list which are falling under the rule.
Comment has been collapsed.
Perhaps for consistency? For a title that was briefly bugged and wasn't even readily available (not everybody got the glitched price) this gets added to the bundle list and yet other titles such as Borderlands 2 (which you could buy multiple 4-pack copies for $5) weren't added even though those price bugs lasted significantly longer and anybody who was online at the time could buy at the glitched price.
I personally don't care about the CV, more CV doesn't change anything for me. I can enter any contribution value giveaway currently. What I do care about is what caused this title to go on the bundle list when other similar price glitches in the past weren't added even though they:
A. available for longer periods of time (Bethesda bundle price glitch was available for half a day)
B. available to everybody and not just a select few people
C. actually spammed on the site and thus could be seen as "abused"
Comment has been collapsed.
I think CV performs a wider role. I see it primarily as a tool allowing us to select if we wish to give to all people or just those who, and how much contributed to the community. My concern is not for my own CV, with my budget I'll never reach the heights of elite 1000 CV giveaways anyway, but rather for control over one's own gifts. I didn't understood that need when I came here (and I came to give spare game I had, not to take one, check my profile if you don't believe), but after reading so many complaints "why I didn't win anything yet" and "fake" callouts I've already decided my next giveaway will be one for contibutors (and from there I'll see).
Comment has been collapsed.
you're new here, so i'll just tell you one thing - the problem is that for normal fair user raising Xk CV is hard if not impossible, yet thera are a lot of ways of not-fair boosting CV - and that's what we're angry about, cause system is flawed and you never know what is fair and what not. So setting CV only GA may take some lazy leechers away, but you will still remain with people who just boosted their CV :>
Oh and 1k CV isn't so elite anymore - good GAs with 1k CV get ~200 entries ;p
Comment has been collapsed.
I agree that current system is... well, very far from perfect. I tell that from looking on what was on sale since I joined. We really should discuss possibilities of improving the system instead arguing if there should be CV or not so I tired to make some insights below.
1k GAa are still elite for me - I'll never get there fairly, and I won't have it any other way.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm a new user, just over a month of membership, so I may not know or understand something, but I wonder if it worked better if CV depended on number of giveaways of certain title, i.e. rarely given games gave 100% CV, and for frequently given games CV would deteriorate with each giveaway created? What do you think? In theory it could limit bundles exploitation without the need for bundled games list.
I would also welcome return of games from exploit list, for zero CV. Therefore there would be no point in exploitation of free keys, while allowing people who don't have facebook account or didn't knew about time-limited free offer to get those games through giveaway system.
Comment has been collapsed.
Why not? Lots of people here say they CV is bad because it's not in spirit of giving, but taking, and that they would give even if there was no CV system. Others claim that CV is needed - I can see that its principle is valid. But we have two opposite groups and rather uninteresting list of giveaways full of the same games everytime there's a bundle or sale since I joined. So it's clear we need some compromise here instead of discussion of current CV or no CV at all. I don't say my idea is perfect, it's just an idea, one of many we should present, discuss and finally implement some of them.
At least that's what we did, when we worked on evaluation and optimization systems.
Comment has been collapsed.
bacause then you would have normal users who just want to share gifts with wide community (publics), smaller community (puzzles, privates, etc) and groups but ALSO you would still have contri boosters who would not think about if the game is nice, but about how much it will earn them. Right now normal user and contri booster have the same level let's say, just normal user spent more money on it. In your system not only contri boosters would be still spending less, but also would have advantage over normal contributors
Comment has been collapsed.
lets say in your system a game would loose 1% value per GA created (it doesn't matter how much realy, but with 1% the example would be faster to follow ;P). Normal user see an awesome deal, let's even imagine he's the first to find about it (he's lurking through reddit game deals for example), the game isn't very good, but anyways he buys 2 copies one for public GA and one for group or puzzle of his choice. Then other nortmal user do same and so on and on - first gets biggest CV, but 2nd, 3rd etc got quite nice CV as well. Now imagine contri booster finds about deal first - he doesn't think about is the game good or bad, he just look at it's CV value, see awesome deal, buy 70 copies, make short GA instantly so his GA would end b4 everyones elses, after an hour he gets biggest CV possible from certain game, and users who give 1-2 copies of a certain game, so give away various games are in disadvantage. Even if they give away 1-2 copies of this game they will still get smaller CV than this 1 person who got promo first and decided to do mass contri boosting.
my point is: standard contributor worries about value of the game itself (is it good etc), why conti booster worries only about maximum CV boost. While normal users would create singe GA here and there, and CV would decrease relatively slowly during time, Contri booster would worry only about his CV and right away why he creates his booster GA all normal users would recieved smaller CV compared to him.
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh, I get it, and you're right of course. Thank you for clarifying that for me. After much more thinking I believe for my idea to work the algorithm would have to be much more complex, evaluating each user individually, instead of just evaluating the game in discrete portion of time. And maybe with a limitation e.g. to one Ga/game/user at a time or sth. I would be happy to try implementing that in standalone application, but on website, in realtime... Not good really.
Still, I'm still afraid current method is bad in terms of giveaways variety if we assume that CV significantly affects GA pool composition, and by looking on current composition we can assume it does. Bundle list by it's definition is going to include all currently existing elements in finite amount of time. It is a really interesting theoretical problem and I would love to commit some serious time to it, but I'm afraid I don't have that time right now.
Gosh, I should have stayed at the university.
Anyway, all of this is not going to affect my activity here. CV is very small factor in my plans.
Comment has been collapsed.
If you twist someones words enough, you can make them say almost anything!
I'll be honest and admit I don't quite remember the original wording I had before I reworded it, but if you are basing your reply off my original post then that means it took you 5 minutes just to write that reply!
Comment has been collapsed.
lol I'm not surprised I am surprised that serious sam hd 1 and 2 didn't make it in since they were 95% off and that's why there's so many of them popping up.
Comment has been collapsed.
I asked Shobo to add it to the bundle list as soon as the price bug was there, as in that condition it was prone to abuse. Now that it was just a pricing bug it'll probably be removed from the bundle list. Obviously we don't track prices 24/7, and bundle list is maintained manually, so it might take some time before changes occur. It was just chance that it was seen and added to the bundle list and other pricing bugs weren't.
Comment has been collapsed.
Keep in mind Shobo maintains the list, and he does an incredible job. The entire list is a grey zone and it's open to opinion, with difficult decisions on a daily basis. He's managed to maintain some sense of sanity in the list as we explore alternatives for the contributor system, and I think he deserves more credit. Nonetheless, errors happen like anything in life. Tryst has been removed from the list based on user feedback and since it was a temporary pricing error, which was not exploited as he may have anticipated.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's not about Tryst, it's about policy regarding pricing errors which now seems unclear.
Comment has been collapsed.
I am not mad at Shobo, I am sure he has his hands full. I just want some clarity on the bundle list. Or at least some consistency.
It wasn't that Tryst got added to the bundle list that's the problem, it's that it was added with every similar deal/bug beforehand having been kept off said list.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes, as long as they were on sale I would have bought them to give away, the amount of CV I'm getting for them is inconsequential. It's an awesome game and people should play it, since I noticed it was on sale, I thought now would be a good time to do so since I could give it to more people than if it wasn't on sale. Besides, if I were so worried about CV as you're implying I wouldn't have purchased Skyrim or 100 copies of Fortix at full value to give away (funny how your selective vision conveniently tuned those out) If something I have given away or am going to give away drops in value or goes on the bundle list you won't see me complaining. Because gaining CV is not the reason I give games away. If the entire CV system was scrapped tomorrow, I would still give them away. People's own greed makes it impossible for them to comprehend someone having a different reason for doing things than they do.
Comment has been collapsed.
Alright. We all giveaway games when they are on sale, you can look at my giveaways, I can look at yours, we look at just about anyone on SG and we'll see that 99% of the games people give away are bought on sale, the better the sale the more people decide to give it away.
This was the case BEFORE contributor giveaways were introduced. This whole CV obsession hasn't changed anything in that regard. What it HAS changed is what people DON'T giveaway. What I used from your list was an example. There is a great sale on Saints Row, and yes, I agree, it's a fun game. But people are going to giveaway the DLCs and the full package, not the regular game, because it was in a bundle some time ago. Same thing with the Alan Wake thing. And even worse in the case of games that were in a bundle years ago and never since like people have mentioned Super Meat Boy and such.
I've made giveaways before the Contributor giveaways was introduced, I've made giveaways before the bundle list was introduced and I was probably one of the ones that wanted the CV requirement to be introduced the most as I thought it would entice me more into making public giveaways. What I did not anticipate was the bundle list and the effect that list would have on not only me, but the entire SG community as a whole.
And no, I am not going to stick my head in the sand and ignore CV entirely. I am a longtime member of this community, I enjoy this community and CV is now a feature of this community. I will happily speak my mind about it but I am not going to pretend it doesn't exist. If CG decides to remove CV giveaways or change the way it's calculated or how the bundle list is maintained I will deal with it, I will speak my mind about but I won't ignore it and act like it's somehow not a part of this community and affecting it.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't think that was a very good way to approach the issue haha
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm just saying that (most of the) games with big reductions tend to end up as a bundle game after the "big" promotions. And that I'm not scanning the bundle list before I make giveaways.
But you have a very good argument, since I wouldn't mark them as bundle game either.
Comment has been collapsed.
19 Comments - Last post 23 minutes ago by vinirockman
215 Comments - Last post 26 minutes ago by VeniVidiVici
1,912 Comments - Last post 30 minutes ago by Axelflox
8,590 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by Wolveruno
9 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by Sh4dowKill
16,367 Comments - Last post 3 hours ago by steveywonder75
343 Comments - Last post 3 hours ago by Zepy
1,554 Comments - Last post 48 seconds ago by JCDenton
72 Comments - Last post 6 minutes ago by lav29
40 Comments - Last post 10 minutes ago by lav29
215 Comments - Last post 11 minutes ago by sirnathaniel
16 Comments - Last post 11 minutes ago by damianea103
559 Comments - Last post 11 minutes ago by Madpie24
197 Comments - Last post 11 minutes ago by lav29
I am sorry, but WTF? Steam price bugs counts as bundle items now?
If that is that the case, then why isn't Sleeping Dogs in the bundle list? Or The Sims Medieval? Or hell, what about Dead Island Riptide, I got that for 1£. Two Worlds Velvet Edition?
Hell, if the only prerequisite for being on the bundle is 90% or more off then why isn't all the games that can be gotten for 95%+ off in the russian store on the bundle list?
This has gotten out of hand to the point where the only way people gain contributer is new releases and targeted exploitation.
Just to be clear here, I am not asking for some grand restructuring of the contributor system, that's a bigger argument. I am just saying that whoever is in charge on the bundle list needs to either add EVERY game that has had a way to get big discounts/exploits, which would eventually cover practically all games on steam, or just go back to it just covering bundle games.
EDIT1: What about this? This qualifies as a bundlelist item?
EDIT2: How about this? This bundle worthy?
EDIT3: Tryst removed from the bundle list. Leaving this open as I would still like to get some clarity as to what qualifies something for the bundle list.
EDIT4: Steam seems to be in a price buggy mood. The new Civ expansion in the BR store was 1.75 USD
Comment has been collapsed.