It's too bad that April Fools is already past, or I would would make a thread entitled "ELIMINATE GIVEAWAYS." Something like:
Steamgifts remains one of the best Contributor Value sites on the internet, but I feel that our obsession with giveaways is starting to detract from this. It was fun to combine CV with giveaways for a while, but the experiment has clearly failed; therefore, I think that we should get rid of the giveaway system.
Now, I can hear you asking -- where will I get Contributor Value from if I can't make giveaways? Well, my idea is to have people notationally declare that they have given away a game, without actually giving it away. This will solve most of the problems contributor value has been having up until now -- since you don't actually have to give away the games you're declaring, there's no incentive to focus on sales or bundles or whatever, and no need to have a bundle list. People can just declare that they're giving away whatever games they feel are best. In fact, since no actual games are changing hands, we can just declare that we're giving away games that don't even exist yet, like Half Life 3!
This one simple solution will solve all our problems. People were obsessed with CV, but it's clear that the real problem here is giveaways. We need to get rid of giveaways so the CV system can work properly.
Comment has been collapsed.
"The real problem with CV is that it's obviously intended as an incentive to create giveaways."
No it isn't. It was a thank you to people for gifting. Contributor giveaways weren't here at the start of the site.
Comment has been collapsed.
The problem with CV it that it has this halo of "better odds" and "exclusiveness" around thus it makes people eager to exploit it.
I know because I've been there, now I do not really care about it as I simply randomly give things away. But yeah.
Comment has been collapsed.
I like the points but I think another thing should be added. 10% is still more than it's actual value for bundles. I believe that what another person had suggested would be better. That each bundled game should be counted as $1 ea.
Comment has been collapsed.
Which is 10% for the absolute majority of bundle games anyway.
How do you think all the recent giveaways for Bioshock Infinite, Xcom and Tomb Raider should be credited, when we can be sure that the majority of them were complimentary keys?
Comment has been collapsed.
What do you mean complimentary keys? Are you talking about the keys/games that came as a part of the pre-order bonuses?
Comment has been collapsed.
Lolz...I thought you were saying that there were free keys for Bioshock Inf and Tomb Raider somewhere...lolz
Anyways, those can't be exploited and a person only gets 1 per pre-order. I sincerely doubt that people would've bought and added Bioshock Infinite to multiple accounts that already had the two games/three games just to give a total of $70 of CV away. The bundles are basically spending a few dollar amount that is usually less than double digits(0<x<10)for up to three digit(x<$200) CV, a around 2000% increase of what they originally paid which could be bought multiple times for cheap. For the pre-orders, people would be quite retarded to activate it on the same account multiple times just for the pre-order bonus. But let's just say they already had the pre-orders and they got the pre-order for Bioshock Infinite. XCOM is about $50 and Bioshock is around $20. That's $70 of CV, which they paid $60 for basically. That's not too outrageous at all in my opinion.
Comment has been collapsed.
Everyone who posts these threads keeps mentioning a $30 cap. There is no $30 cap and they should learn how the system works before they criticize it.
Note: I don't think it's working and would like contributor removed but at least I understand how the system works.
[]()
[]()
Edit: You also are completely wrong about your 4th point. If you create a giveaway before the bundle you will always get full value for it. If you create it on or after the day of the bundle (like was the case with the recently Humble Weekly fiasco) you will have that contribution converted to bundle.
Comment has been collapsed.
I mentioned this in a different thread.
It seems like almost everyone forgot about it....
Comment has been collapsed.
Well how is anyone who's new here supposed to know about it, unless they go through the forum thread by thread?
Comment has been collapsed.
That would have to assume also that people actually informs themselves before doing anything.
Comment has been collapsed.
yeah I sort of thought it was implied that there was some inclination towards learning how the site works in the OP (i.e. "so they wonder if you can actually win stuff here. They come to these excellent, highly searchable forums and ask if anyone has ever won something.")
Comment has been collapsed.
I've seen plenty of users that did not have the very least idea of how the site actually worked.
But yeah, for simplicity's sake let's say that everyone makes their own research.
And to be honest I must have to admit that information in the FaQ is sometimes incomplete and not really clear, but it ceratinly gives a good overall vision of how this site works.
Comment has been collapsed.
It shocks me sometimes. Hands down the first thing I did when I got here was read the FAQ in its entirety. But, that's because I don't like to blindly dive into things. It's not like it's hidden. "blah blah blah it's at the bottom in tiny letters" Did everyone forget its big and at the top when you first, I mean very very first type in www.steamgifts.com? Log out and look again if you don't believe me.
Comment has been collapsed.
I was the same way, when I found this site I was basically like "what's the catch, clearly something is up, this is too good to be true, a site where people selflessly giveaway things to others looks in awe" went in search of the FAQ and read it thoroughly
Comment has been collapsed.
Admittedly when the bundle system was first put into place, if I'm not mistaken, it did retroactively go through people's giveaways and check them against the bundle list and recalculated the CV. I remember cg showing how to use a certain url variation of your account to get it to show what the new value would be (maybe /new?) and I remember certain people dropping by thousands because they gave out mass copies of Nuclear Dawn after it had been in the Indie Royale bundle (but before the CV system went into place), so in a sense it isn't entirely a false statement, even if that's not what he was directly alluding too :P
Comment has been collapsed.
Wasn't Nuclear Dawn excluded for some reason? I mean. I think something fishy happened some time there.
Comment has been collapsed.
$25 bundle contributor whitelisted + 20% value from bundles on non bundle (or in that case whitelisted) CV = $30
Examples: $75 from bundles, $75 from non bundles: 25 (whitelisted) + 75 (non bundle) + 20 (20% from 100) = 120. 30$ below "Total"
75 from non bundles, 45 from bundles: 75+25 + 20 (20% from the 100)=120. Giving away a bundle now won't increase further
25 from non bundle, 25 from bundle: 25+25. Nothing lost
25 from non bundle, 50 from bundle: 25+25+10
Comment has been collapsed.
Bundle games are a contribution. They're a game someone wants, and someone will win it. Credit them. None of this $30 cap.
Well you can always give them, if you really like to share you won't mind about the CV you'll earn from them.
Comment has been collapsed.
Basically you write a big rant that your bundle games dont count,but then you end with the epeen argument? Seriously most high contributors that didnt abuse the system were here before contributor was introduced,they dont care about much,they would love to get rid of it. So yeah...you can say what you want,this is not about "being generous" blablablabla you wanted to max your contributor as easy as possible,it failed,you are pissed. Goodbye,won't miss you. Good luck on galagib and their high amount of quality giveaways.
Comment has been collapsed.
You haven't read a word I said. I was never talking about myself. I couldn't care less about CV, and I certainly won't be running off to any other giveaway website. If I want a game, hell, I'll just fucking buy it. But everyone else seems to care about CV, the ones who don't have it because they want it, and the ones who have it because they don't want the others to get it.
But this is what I'm talking about. Everyone knows the system doesn't work. But instead of taking suggestions as what they are, you make me out to be butthurt and sour. Learn to read.
Comment has been collapsed.
I read everything.
Before you start with suggestions its all about generalizing ppl coming to this site,being treated like shit and always just want to raise their CV to improve their winning chances. These are all claims you make,if someone gets "learn maths" etc. then usually because he fails on simple things that even the site does for one. Its about using your brain. "Bundle is bad" is usually an answer about ppl complaining that their CV doesnt raise above $30,at which point they already failed to inform themself.
Then come your suggestions,that show that you also have no clue about the system itself and you also just create another holes for exploiting.
The fact that you come now with the critics and looking at your profile,added to your "Have a nice day" leaves me to the conclusion that a) you will leave here and b) you are butthurt with the current system especially after today when you lost quite a bit contributor value.
Learn to read? Learn the system!
People look down on most suggestions because they are neither new nor helping at all,its always about changing the system to their own advantage. Which again leads me to the point: Do you even know high contributors? Pretty much every high contributor I know that did not abuse the system would like to get rid of it.
Comment has been collapsed.
People want to improve their winning chances because that's what the site seems to be about. And the only real way to do it is CV. This is the status quo. I didn't say people are treated like shit, you made that up.
'Learn math' is a reply I have frequently seen when people ask about winning. They are then told to enter giveaways with fewer entrants, or to raise their CV so they can get into groups and contributor GAs and improve their odds. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this out. It's all about CV.
I never said my suggestions were perfect and would bring world peace. They were things I've been tossing around for days, wondering if I should bring them up or not. Forgive me for not having been here since the dawn of time and not knowing every nook and cranny of the system. I don't know what has or hasn't been tried. So debate style would be to educate me on these things. But if it helps you sleep at night, by all means, make me out to be a sour newbie who's just looking for cheap ways to increase his CV.
If most high contribs want the CV system gone, why is it still around?
I am not leaving because I'm butthurt that I haven't won anything or can't get my CV up. I am leaving because I see a system that fosters double standards - intentional or not - and sends way too many mixed signals - and I hate both. I am leaving because I see an elitist community full of strife. I am leaving because there are more productive ways to spend my time - like writing that dystopian novel. There's certainly a lot of inspiration and material here.
Comment has been collapsed.
A lot of ppl were here before there was CV,a lot of ppl gave games before there was CV,I am pretty sure not everyone cares for CV and winning chances.
If you wanna critize the system then you have to know it,thats it. If you don't know it work yourself in or leave it be.
CV is still up because imagine ppl going mad if you take their reason they contributed at all....again,I am not talking about those who dont care for the CV. The Community doesnt make the rules,the staff has to do it,and they have to be careful with decisions,as you see,not everyone likes them.
Finally....if you leave because all of this,why leave your 2 cents,why not just leave and close the door behind you?
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, I should probably have done that. Sometimes my mouth is faster than my brain.
Comment has been collapsed.
Wow... The OP had some things to say that were worth considering, and it was presented as suggestions. Your response, on the other hand, comes across as rude, offensive, angry, and vindictive, the perfect example of a rant. Looking at further responses by you in this thread, I see a continuation of the same style. It would seem that someone pissed in your Wheaties, this morning and so you're taking it out on everyone else.
I expect I will be the next victim for pointing this out....
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes,if someone says he will leave the site but does it with a big show stating things that are at least questionable I wonder why just didnt keep it for himself and see no point discussion it further as a) his points made arent worth discussing,he will leave anyway and b) some things werent even true,he complains about generalizing,but he does it himself.
So yeah,if you think this is constructive and worth discussion before "check your facts and try again" (whic he wont do as he will leave) then I see your point,but to me it was just a "Before I go I want you to know that this sucks"
"Looking at the further responses by you in this thread"...I wonder which one you mean? The one I clarify for Matt how the 20% rule works? The one where I tell anikaos why FS got a bad reputation? The one with monukai that clearly was a joke? Cmon...Try harder
Also,you complain that I just rant? What is the point of your post?
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't mind not getting CV for bundle items,but a quick look in the forums makes you think giving away bundle leftovers is a bad thing,
i recently saw a thread about "faerie solitaire" where the OP was asking whether he can giveaway the game or not, and the responses he got made me stop giving away the faerie solitaire games which i bought as a 4 pack because i don't want to look like a leecher who got the keys for free and created a mass giveaway,
it doesn't give a fair impression to the group owners or others who visit my profile.
Comment has been collapsed.
Do you want a piece of advice?
Do whatever the fuck you want. Always (As long as you don't hurt anybody, that's true)
Don't care about what people will say, and less about a bunch of grumpy extrangers on the internet as myself.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, I gave copies of Faerie Solitaire right after the 25k giveaway, and not long after the massive key drop that happened 8 months ago. Some people might have thought I was giving away a free game but I didn't care. (Although I sated in the giveaway that it was giftable copies so of course people had little reason to complain.)
There's nothing wrong with giving bundle games only, and giving games hat were once abused. What's really annoying people are those who come to the forum to complain about it. My CV would probably be higher if the games I gave away hadn't been bundled at some point, especially since only one actually came from a "bundle" (Humble Weekly Sale actually) but you won't find me complaining in the forums about any lost CV. Then again, I've read the FAQ and the threads about CV so I knew what to expect.
Comment has been collapsed.
It'd be nice if the mods were more transparent and weren't giving 50 different signals at once. Maybe a forum post that states clearly what the purpose of this website is, and how they intend it to operate. If they intend it to be a charity website, then why have CV only giveaways, and if users are encouraged to donate games, even bundle games, then why make them worth next to nothing?
Right now everyone seems to have their own interpretation on what this website is supposed to be, but we're missing a bit of feedback from the actual creators or admins, who can really set things straight.
Comment has been collapsed.
I think that it's a raffle site. No more no less.
There's also a community feeling sometimes but that's it. The site is a means not an end.
Comment has been collapsed.
I am having a nice day, thank you!
Comment has been collapsed.
2 and 3: He suggested a set amount of giveaways. People can't save until time runs out, and a dragged out flood isn't a flood, it's normality.
Comment has been collapsed.
Say you've done three GAs for a bundle game, you've gotta wait another week or two to give away the same game again. Or you could limit the total number of giveaways for a certain game. Sorry, we already have 100 giveaways of Red Orchestra, try again later
Yes they can. He said you have to wait a week to give out more games... meaning people save their keys and use them later. Or there can't be more than 100 current public giveaways of the game... meaning people save their keys and use them later. It does exactly what I said it does: drags the flood of keys out over a longer period of time
Comment has been collapsed.
Firstly, those values were suggestions. Not set in stone. Secondly, would it be better to have a flood like the Red Orchestra one every time such a bundle goes on sale, or to have the same amount of giveaways stretched out over a longer time period, thus somewhat blending in with the rest of the regular GAs and not causing such a ruckus? Because one thing is for sure. They won't go away entirely.
Comment has been collapsed.
Like I said, if it's a set amount in a given time period, it's not a flood. A flood means it's all at once, that it's overwhelming. If you stretch out the water from a flood over a year, it's no longer a flood just a bunch of normal rains.
Comment has been collapsed.
I know the values were suggestions. They might help with the 'flood' problems that make the site lag, but then instead of having 10,000,000,000 copies of Metro 2033 released on one day, we get them released continuously for the next 3 years... whereas the way we have it now it sucks for a day or three, but then it's done. I guess that would help the site lag issues, but honestly I'd be just as annoyed seeing the same keys every day for a year because it went on a good sale once.
It may work, I don't really have an opinion too strongly on #3. The others are what I was pretty opposed to, and it just seemed a waste to not throw up a criticism of #3 as well.
Comment has been collapsed.
I do use SG+. Not everyone does. I try to view things from the point of view of others, so that I don't try to argue for a system that caters only to myself. My problem is that it would be annoying to people that don't use SG+ to see the same giveaways everyday. And like I said, I don't have that strong of an opinion because as you so eloquently pointed out, SG+ can fix that.
Comment has been collapsed.
Because you don't understand my analogies. If there are 25 giveaways of metro or the ship a week, do you care? It's 25 giveaways and some people may actually want the games. 25 games is not a flood, again, it's normality. 500 games at a time is a flood.
or the opposite:
If you condensed all giveaways for one game that are made in a year, into one week, that'd be horrible even if it was a good game.
Comment has been collapsed.
must continue to argue until opponent shares views
Comment has been collapsed.
Disagree with all of the suggestions for many of the reasons that have been given on this thread, and when they have been raised previously.
However, it's too bad you don't feel the site meets your needs.
You're probably already aware of them, but perhaps Playblink/Gala Giveaways will be more to your taste?
Comment has been collapsed.
No, I actually think this site is probably still the best of those options. It just needs to stop sending mixed signals, be unambiguously clear about its purpose, and get rid of double standards.
Comment has been collapsed.
Respect for the edit, and I agree with much of the above post - the mechanics of the contributor system is, for the most part, good, but would benefit from some tweaking (although it will never be possible to please everyone).
Hope you stick around.
Comment has been collapsed.
I promise I won't go beyond three points:
Point 1: If you actually are seeking to be constructive, avoid generalizations and avoid classifying people into groups that you critique/insult. Essentially anyone with a passionate view on this matter regardless of stance is going to come away from this thread feeling insulted by the way you structure your argument
Point 2: More importantly, this will always be a flawed system, and no matter how you implement it, it's going to continue to be flawed. There will always be loopholes, and there were always be people whom by nature who are completely selfish and willing to exploit the system (I'm not talking about people giving away bundle games, I'm talking about people who make private giveaways and have two alt accounts enter it and then never have those accounts erroneously mark giveaways as received, as one example of what I mean by exploit). There will also be people who always view it as a business as well, who are just trying to maximize their wins while minimizing their givings, and will use all the loopholes and advantages (for example people paying $.01 for the old HIBs before they made the $1 for Steam keys change, abusing a bundle whose proceeds go to charity, causing them to lose money (paypal transaction cost more than the one cent they make) for the sake of their contributor value. People were doing this before the CV system was even in place.) Just like when someone steals something from a supermarket, all the customers are the ones who end up paying for it through increased prices to make up for the differences. What am I getting at? Really just trying to explain the nature of the problem and the futility of trying to fix something that will always be inherently broken. Likewise there will always been people who are unhappy with the system no matter how unbroken the system is, and undoubtedly some of those people will have valid reasons too.
Point 3: My understanding of the system is that it was originally meant to REWARD people who giveaway games (at least the reason on the surface, one could argue that it was implemented for the sole purpose of adding incentive to make giveaways and thus increasing site traffic, etc.), but inevitably it turned into incentive for everyone to find whatever means possible to increase their CV and get better odds. There is a difference between rewards and incentivizing something, even if there is some gray area where the two ideas intersect, and a lot of the flak comes about (I think) because people are irritated that what was originally meant to be a reward system has essentially turned into an incentivizing system. I say this only so you can better understand why some people may be upset about certain things you mentioned.
Comment has been collapsed.
Most legal and taxation systems are seen to be unfair by at least some of their nation's population. That is not a solid argument for their abolition though.
Comment has been collapsed.
True, but irrelevant. The removal of a tax/legal system will completely destroy an entire nation. The removal of CV will likely not destroy this website. And tax/legal systems can be done fairly, it would just be so insanely difficult and complex to actually do so that it would be almost impossible. Plus, it relies on the individuals within the system to administrate it fairly and correctly.
Fixing CV is not almost impossible. It is impossible, because the only way to fix it is to give CV equal to the amount spent by the contributing user, and determining that is impossible.
Comment has been collapsed.
My point (as I am sure you understood) is simply that not everything that cannot be entirely fair should be removed. That alone is not sufficient reason.
Comment has been collapsed.
This has been the most constructive reply I have received so far. Thank you.
As you may have seen, I have somewhat revised my OP, having realised that I wasn't fully informed about certain things.
Point 1 is fair. I did not mean to generalise, but it's hard to not so so when you look at these forums. I've seen a lot of snotty answers. Many people who have been around for a while and are used to the way things work, may not realise that the site isn't exactly forthcoming about how it works, what its purpose is and what you absolutely need to know before you even think of starting to use it. I've read several comments on the ambiguity of the FAQ. Let's be honest, the forums aren't exactly debate friendly either.
Point 2: yes, the system will always be flawed. That's why you don't put it in place and leave it be. It has to evolve with the exploits people find, while not punishing or disadvantaging those with honest intentions. I have seen a few new threads with polls and suggestions, which shows me that all the debate, all the suggestions, however flawed, aren't going unnoticed. And that's a good thing. Running a community like this one requires that kind of work. I've been involved in the running of much smaller communities, and it's never a walk in the park.
Point 3: the problem is that it doesn't matter what it was intended to be, it matters what it's being used as. And currently the CV system is being used as a barrier of entry to groups, giveaways and as a status token in the community. It's the carrot that's being dangled in front of every new user. If the community is about giving, then that needs to be made unambiguously clear. Right now, the first impression anyone gets is that the community is about winning.
Comment has been collapsed.
I definitely agree that since the CV system has gone into place that this site has shifted predominantly from giving to winning, and that problem indeed is the biggest one to solve as it undermines the whole idea of the site and the community.
Comment has been collapsed.
About point 3, before the contributor's giveaways were in place people still cared about contributor's value because it was often then way into smaller groups where donators met to have giveaways among themselves. So it was and will continue to be an entry barrier into groups, giveaways and a status in the community. It just allowed a larger group to take part in the contributor's giveaways without having to create a bunch of elitists groups.
Comment has been collapsed.
re#4(the other 3 seem ok and its easier to reply negative so 4 is all I'm talking about)
they didn't really spit in anybody's faces. the humble weekly bundle shouldn't have ever not been bundled anyway..(they only left it off to see what it would become. (i guess meaning like that first one for bastion would have been cool to leave off as a sale, thq may be a one off, but by this third one a theme became clear and its either unmark the other humbles or mark this since hib apparently intended them to be basically the same)) if thats all people are upset over...well it shouldn't have been possible for somebody to spend $43 to get 2k cv anyway since it breaks cv so much it may as well not exist at that point(and since we're talking about incentives allowing that to continue actually disincentives the guy spending his money on aaa games instead of abusing bundles and buying a ton of $1 packs(not that he likely cares but still) as he will have access to fewer cv filtered gifts and so worse odds than the guy who cheated the system for 1/3 the cost) so.
besides its always been part of the bundle rules that asterisks are applied retroactively to the bundle's start date. so if you're gifting for cv, find a bundle not marked and get gifts in before it gets ruled on and marked thinking amazingly steamgifts decided this was ok, well if something seems too good to be true it probably isn't.
It isn't retroactive forever its retroactive to the time the bundle began. that way you don't get points for being faster on the draw than steam gift support when you see a bundle they haven't gotten to marking yet. If you gifted bastion a year before it was bundled your cv is untouched(there is entirely separate from that the devaluing over time when steam changes its prices but thats not intentional its an unfortunate sideeffect of how the site pulls point value and other data from steam. imo i agree that should be fixed so if you gifted fallout at 60 you don't get nerfed down to 10, but thats an entirely separate issue from what happened today)
Comment has been collapsed.
Regarding the HWS, Bastion was already a bundle game when that sale happened. I didn't see a terrible amount of Red Faction and Darksiders giveaways, but that's probably because I already have half of them and thus they were filtered. But the Red Orchestra flood was ridiculous. I was half tempted to buy the bundle just do I could filter the games (yes, I know SG+ exists, but I use the site mostly with my iPad...)
Comment has been collapsed.
yeah, it seemed strange how few there were of the thq weekly considering its cv efficiency(40 +7 bundled(and since 7 is less thatn 20% 40 its functionally 47cv to the dollar)) given how people behaved with the crazy machines(less than half that). if people were going to jump up 1000cv spending $50 why not jump 1000+ from $22? And then jumped at the next slightly less valuable bundle instead.
I guess some of it was that theoretical crazymachines guy maybe wanting to gift 100 games for cheap and not actually trying to boost(I know if i had a pile of $ i might be the sort to accidentally cv boost thinking it would be cool to gift a ton of copies of games on the cheap(except I read the forums and knew that wouldn't fly well lol)(goes back to #1, I'd said that in the past too so I agree on that. why hate on bundle games if people want them, just I also view that separate from the deliberate boosters(by which I only ever mean the extreme ones, not the guy who gifted cause its cheap and may have wanted the cv too. the guy who abused the frell out of it))), and maybe thq not getting marked(crazymachines had already escaped bundle list in the past at least once, thq weekly they probably assumed would get the asterisk) made people feel safe with this week?(probably this)
Comment has been collapsed.
I've never felt assaulted by parentheses until now.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, I'd just found that one. Linky for joo, ya lawbreaker!
Comment has been collapsed.
Having a game already in your library effectively shields you from being bombarded by it if you've got filtering turned on. As far as I know, it was just as bad.
Comment has been collapsed.
I just wanted to comment and say I agree with all of your points, although I have no hope of the changes ever taking effect. I'm pretty much a lurker, entering a few giveaways for games I want (The Ship is still taunting me), occasionally putting in a few words on the forums, but I read a lot of the goings-on and to be honest, the site seems pretty broken.
Comment has been collapsed.
35 Comments - Last post 18 seconds ago by pb1
2 Comments - Last post 2 minutes ago by pb1
65 Comments - Last post 4 minutes ago by pb1
712 Comments - Last post 17 minutes ago by MeguminShiro
20 Comments - Last post 38 minutes ago by sensualshakti
226 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by DeliberateTaco
1,086 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by steveywonder75
64 Comments - Last post 32 seconds ago by Orionid
59 Comments - Last post 1 minute ago by yugimax
132 Comments - Last post 1 minute ago by Ignition365
244 Comments - Last post 6 minutes ago by Feelside
42 Comments - Last post 11 minutes ago by grego87
21 Comments - Last post 56 minutes ago by cg
112 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Choco316
Major Edit
So it seems I had my wires crossed, spoke too soon and didn't fully understand how some things worked. I apologise for that. Yes, the FAQ are a bit wonky and it takes a fair amount of digging to get all the facts, but I should probably have done that. I operated on erroneous assumptions, and therefore my suggestions aren't quite what I'd hoped they would be.
Some people seemed to take this as a grand statement before leaving. It wasn't intended to be that. I was accused of being butthurt about the CV system. I am not. But you may believe what you want. Everyone's mileage varies. If you want to take a swipe at me, please feel free to do so.
My apologies to anyone I have offended or caught on the wrong foot. Below is the post as I originally posted it. I still believe some of the suggestions have some merit, if tweaked and tested. I still believe the current system is at least heavily flawed. But if you read the below, take it with a pinch of salt.
So, we all know by now that the current contributor value system is broken to the hilt.
Here's the status quo as I described it yesterday in another post. Put yourself into the shoes of the average person that just arrived at this site. They probably came here because some site or some friend told them 'look, you can win free games there'. Because that's what people want. They want free shit. So they get here, and the first thing they see is a huge banner saying "Win free steam gifts". Good stuff. Exactly what they want.
They enter a few giveaways and nothing happens. So they wonder if you can actually win stuff here. They come to these excellent, highly searchable forums and ask if anyone has ever won something. They get replies like 'learn some math' and 'enter more giveaways'. Usually coming from people who have won a fair whack of stuff. So they look for ways to improve their odds of winning something.
Somewhere along the way they figure out things about contributor value, and see that having a higher CV buys them their way into private groups and exclusive giveaways. So they look for ways to raise their CV - on the cheap, obviously. They buy a few bundles, put them up for GA, and start wondering why their CV doesn't go past 30. They start asking questions, and get replies ranging from 'giving away bundle games is baaaaaad' to 'doing giveaways for CV is missing the spirit' - usually coming from people who have a high CV (legit or not), have won a fair whack of exclusive and group GAs, and call people with low CV leechers.
The main issue here is mixed signals and double standards. Yesterday giveaways from the HWS counted for full CV, today they don't. Retroactively, a shit ton of people have lost CV. Which is probably the biggest issue I have with the whole system.
So what to do? I've been reluctant to make these suggestions, seeing how this forum normally treats them. But I don't think I will be frequenting this site for much longer, so I'm kinda past the point of caring. Bear in mind, this is not a working solution. It might not work at all, or the suggestions will need to be refined, tweaked and tested. But above all, they should be considered before being shot down.
Bundle games are a contribution. They're a game someone wants, and someone will win it. Credit them. None of this $30 cap. If a game is in the bundle list, credit it at, say, 10% of the face value. For starters. It'll make it harder for CV farmers, but won't discourage the people that give away bundle leftovers. (I usually buy bundles for one or two games, and have no use for the rest). Plus. I have yet to see anyone complain about the points they get from bundle GAs, which they in turn can use on their precious exclusive/private/group giveaways.
Let the bundle list expire. Currently, games are on the bundle list forever. Make it a variable timeout, it doesn't have to be fixed. Could be based on number of giveaways over a certain time, or frequency of appearance of the game in bundles. Something like Bastion will expire sooner, something like Darksiders will take longer to come off the bundle list. But don't make it static, and don't leave a game on there forever.
To discourage floods, you could either limit the number of GAs one person can make for the same game to a maximum of three at a time, with a cool down period involved. Say you've done three GAs for a bundle game, you've gotta wait another week or two to give away the same game again. Or you could limit the total number of giveaways for a certain game. Sorry, we already have 100 giveaways of Red Orchestra, try again later. In really bad cases, just exclude games from being given away for a while.
Don't ever, ever, fucking ever touch a person's CV after the fact, based on sales or bundle inclusions. To say that a giveaway they made a year ago is now worth less because the game is bundled or on sale, is spitting in their faces. Either be fair and let all CV depreciate over time, regardless of game. If you can't do that, then leave it alone. Edit: it would appear that I am wrong about how this works. I was pointed to an 8 month old thread which explains it in more detail. Thank you and please accept my apologies.
Of course, you could always get rid of CV altogether. But since so many people like their virtual willy sizes, I see a fat chance of that happening. Plus they wouldn't have anything to base it on when they call other people leechers. Which is my last point. You're over promoting the winning aspect of this site, yet you complain when people come here because they want to win?
Do with this what you will. Have a nice day.
Comment has been collapsed.