Yes but not as separate keys, that's why they're not "bundled" on sgifts
Comment has been collapsed.
even though no other games are off the list for being grouped into one key
I think its more of a galastore thing where they don't want to be responsible(time wise don't want to spend that much listing them) for keeping the list up to date on so many pwyw bundles? thats the only reason I could come up with to leave humble weekly and galastore(the pay what you want ones like crazymachines was) off...its stupid what is and isn't listed. this is the most abusable(thats the whole reason for this bundle list anyway right? to protect cv?) bundle I've seen/heard of but not listed.(We have to stop people from getting $15 cv for $1 by charity pwyw(gifting the whole hib6 key as gratuitous space battles) by blacklisting all of the bundle's contents until the end of time, but $50 for $1(gift all of this weekly thq thing's separate keys) from the same people and same pseudocharity bundle site is ok? makes no sense(especially if you look at frequency. block the rarely occurring bundles but leave the gaping hole of the weekly constantly occurring bundle) why leave off obviously devastatingly abusable bundles while permanently nerfing the contents of far milder ones?
in that case just scrap the (token) bundle list all together, its purpose is entirely moot at this point. (would that even be a bad thing? (if so explain how while also leaving weekly bundle (thq especially) off...its more of a block all the bundles or block none of them thing. blocking some at random is silly, especially looking at which ones))
Pointless to keep updating the list, more so to leave whats already on it listed.
I'd just delete it and be done. the worst that could happen already is with the list in place anyway so...
(edit- reread it and not nearly as blaimy as that sounds. actually it doesn't even really matter to me lol, just asking and explaining my reason.)
Comment has been collapsed.
I'll second that. Ghettoizing the bundle games makes little sense when almost everything on the site has been "bundled" or deeply discounted at some point.
Comment has been collapsed.
I think that if you plan on taking this route you may as well get rid of contributor value, not that I have a problem with that.
Comment has been collapsed.
you may as well get rid of it under the current system anyway so if they can't list every bundle then why not just throw it out. same overall effect on cv but you can stop those "why is asterisk" threads that always confuse noobs and annoy older members, also its easier.(mostly that its apparently easier and more possible than making the list work(although I'd like changing calculation better like aquillion said(some sort of scaling value that reduces worth by how many givaways there are(probably with a min # before that kicks in) and boosts(slightly) for often wishlisted items maybe, or a diminishing returns on the same person gifting the same game repeatedly(actually I kinda like that one more since it seems simpler)) but that felt like too much to ask them to do))
Comment has been collapsed.
I do kind of agree that the list has outused its usefulness. I think that it was created back when Humble Indie Bundle was still giving away 1-cent keys and people were freaking out, panicked over the idea of people spending a dollar on a hundred bundles and giving away all the keys. But they're not doing that anymore.
Also, there are better options for filtering now. Before the list, bundle keys were just banned, because there were few options for filtering and people got pissed off at not being able to find anything else. But that's not a problem anymore; clearly we do want to encourage people to give extra bundle keys away when they happen to have them, and honestly whenever someone wants to spend a few bucks on keys and give them away I'm gonna say that that's ultimately a good thing for SG, whether it's a bundle or an outrageously good sale or whatever.
Certainly I don't think above-the-average keys or keys from a bundle with a high minimum need to be on the list. The typical IndieRoyale bundle has about two or three Steam keys for ~5 now, so it's about $2 each, for games that are usually worth around $10... it's no worse than a particularly good Steam sale.
OTOH, if we want to encourage particular kinds of giveaways, what we really want to encourage is people giving away a wide variety of interesting stuff, and things that few other people are giving away. So I would suggest changing contributor value to some other calculation, where the value of a giveaway is based on things like how many other people have given that game away recently -- this will naturally give people an incentive to give away stuff beyond just bundle and sale games, without requiring work on the part of anyone to maintain a list.
Comment has been collapsed.
yeah, thats better(and agree about indieroyale, it was one of the ones I was thinking of, and bta games never felt like they should be listed either, and fused keys of earlier(up to and including hib6) humbles(had forgotten about that one cent key thing before and including hib4))
once they get the formula right it'd catch everything, (sales, free somewhere, bundles, glitches(it'd take a little time at first but once its done theres no upkeep like with the current list system)) much better than the static list we have now. just reduce the value based on how many are currently(and/or recently) active to nerf it that way.
(I've seen that and liked it before too. the only argument against it that ever comes up seems to be that people would find it confusing at first and it'd take a bit of tweaking to get the formula set and those aren't really good reasons against. people find the asterisk thing confusing at first too(granted its mostly cause the givaway page doesn't have a 2nd asterisk that links to what the star means but))
Comment has been collapsed.
There could be some sort of "bounty list" for games that are currently worth a lot, and it could display the current worth of a game you're giving away when you select it. Though one problem (if values fluctuate a lot) is that people might hold on to keys, hoping the value will go up... hm.
The 'bounty' for a game could increase when there seems to be a lot of demand for it (large numbers of people joining giveaways for it -- though that would have to account for bundle length of time, too.)
Perhaps also allow people to spend points to increase the bounty on a game? (You can't gift a game whose bounty you've recently increased.) That would discourage people from entering giveaways for games they don't really want just to burn extra points by creating a "point sinkhole" that people could use to try and encourage others to give away games they want.
...actually, I really like that last idea. People mindlessly entering a bunch of giveaways (and the fact that the system encourages that) is a bigger problem than bundle keys or contributor value or whatever, to me. Allowing people to spend points to make a game temporarily worth more (and having a "currently most-wanted giveaways" list that people would want to get the games they want onto) would solve both problems at once.
Comment has been collapsed.
Amazon deals are not pay-what-you whant though. They have incredible deals but you still have to buy the games for more than $1.
Comment has been collapsed.
Total War: Rome - $1=10
Crazy Machines Bundle - $1=20
Humble Deal - $1=47
Comment has been collapsed.
The $1 for $50 non-bundle (+$7 bundle) in the humble weekly is worse than the crazy machines one.
However, the reason I haven't added this bundle to the list is then I'd have to add all the indiegala bundles (like Crazy Machines) and then I'd have to add all the Amazon bundles and then we might as well just remove contrib because the bundle list will be larger than the non-bundled list.
Edit: I also don't think it is really that big of deal. There are not many high contributor giveaways anymore. The majority of great odds giveaways are in private groups and people who go crazy and abuse these deals are the ones who'd never get invites to these groups anyway ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
This isn't a bad idea really. For the way the system currently is, it really should adopt a black and white line of what is and isn't bundled, and most bundles seem to have a BTA which pans out well for the most part. I've not seen the Amazon bundles but I'd call it safe to assume that people are paying whatever the bare minimum is if they're giving the games out here. On the one hand, I'm sure that this would require a bit of work on TheShobo's part, but it may also reduce that workload going forward. Or just do away with contribution altogether since it's a bit messy and elitist anyway. That's what Private and Group giveaways are for after all, no?
Comment has been collapsed.
Amazon bundles are exactly the same as Steam bundles. Like publisher packs and whatnot, but just cheaper usually. And you get individual steam keys so you don't "lose" games like with steam.
Comment has been collapsed.
+1, this is by far the best idea, much better than the one in ageofarmageddon thread.
Comment has been collapsed.
There are a couple of differences though:
The Crazy Machines were in limited quantities and they were sold out pretty quickly. This thing has sold over 50.000 bundles already and still has 4 days to go.
With Crazy Machines for every $1 spent you got $20 of contribution, with this thing you get $40 + 7 bundled.
And speaking of groups, that's just another way for people to exploit the system. You make a private group with a couple of your friends and just gift games to each other inside that tiny group and get the contribution like someone who gifts to the general public. But you're also winning about as much as you're gifting, so in effect you're not really gifting anything.
Comment has been collapsed.
I was thinking about the tiny gifts thing. A really exploitative person could do it without actually giving any games, but they'd probably be caught when someone notices that they're not redeeming anything.
Either way, there's actually a simple solution: The system shouldn't allow you to create a group giveaway for a group with below a certain number of people in it on Steamgifts. At a bare minimum, it shouldn't let you create a giveaway for a group with less than three people -- if there's no chance at all involved, just give them the game directly! But I would probably set the minimum group size for SG to let you give gifts to around 10 SG users. Below that, just roll a die or something, don't use SG.
Of course, the catch is that some people might use giveaways to attract people to their group or to attract group members to SG. Still, it wouldn't be that hard to reach 10 SG members before starting the giveaway.
(I say this as someone who was lucky enough to win a game in a group giveaway that only one other person entered -- though in that case, it was just chance; it was an old non-Steamgifts-related group I was in, and I assume nobody else in the group besides me and the gifter was in SG. So I guess it does happen legitimately, and it was a nice surprise for me, anyway!)
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks for the clarification, A lot of threads discuss this subject and it's nice to have a official statement by the person in charge of updating the bundle list, if you don't mind i'll refer to this comment whenever a bundle related question pops up again.
Comment has been collapsed.
Feel free to take my opinion with a grain of salt, but I think that you should just automatically bundle anything that's pay-what-you-want with a minimum of $1 with more than one game. Removing contrib would also be nice.
Comment has been collapsed.
BTW, I thought Darksiders was originally on the bundle list anyways due to the GameStop giveaway? Any reason why it was removed?
Comment has been collapsed.
I thought it was too...
When I saw the weekly humble deal with Darksiders and noticed it wasn't in the bundle list (anymore?) I went ahead and added it back with the date of the Gamestop/informer giveaway because that is when I remember it initially on the bundle list.
Unfortunately the entirety of SteamGifts felt this wasn't the right thing for me to do and I got a lot of hate for it. The mods also complained because it created a mess of tickets "Where'd my contrib go?" so I just went ahead and removed it again.
:(
Comment has been collapsed.
Shhhhh, don't you worry <3
Neither were Crazy Machines.
Comment has been collapsed.
But I thought, when steamgifts already know about the existence of a bundle, then the person who is giving away the bundle has his/her CV reduced. Is that true?
Comment has been collapsed.
When something is added to the bundle list the date at which the bundle started is added as well. Giveaways made on or after that day are automatically considered bundled games.
Comment has been collapsed.
Why are you talking about a book bundle? I'm honestly very confused about what you mean.
Comment has been collapsed.
Amazon Paradox War Chest was $2.50 after EC for $140 worth of CV. It was up for 3 days. Worst one (not free) by far was Two Worlds II Velvet Edition, which was 17 cents for $30 CV.
Comment has been collapsed.
no!
unless you gifted them before the first clue that the game could perhaps come into a bundle came. that's how i spent 2$ on basement coll and got no contrib.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't think everyone should be punished for giving out one copy of a bundled game, but if someone is clearly using a bundle to farm, then I think they should be stopped.
I know it would be complicated and maybe not the easiest to do, but isn't there a way to make it so it is possible to give out one bundled game at its full value, and the rest as what they already class as bundle games. That way people still have the incentive to give away a copy without seeing an opportunity to harvest masses of CV.
Comment has been collapsed.
The main problem is the moderation. SG simply doesn't have enough staff to manage that.
Comment has been collapsed.
A system for that could involve each subsequent copy of the same game is worth less until CV is below a threshold.
Example:
CV for particular copy = (min((base value), max(5.00, (base value) * .70^(number of copies you have gifted in the past 75 days)))
This would allow mass fortix giveaways to maintain value, but prevent egregious abuse. It also allows people to gift games again later, but far enough later that they won't hold onto too many extra copies for future gifting. Having a bundle list might still be nice so that when someone gives away, say two copies of a new game, they don't get 'dinged' for the multigiveaway.
Comment has been collapsed.
Maybe the only way is that people cant simply make more than one giveaway of those bundles, or a time limit period.
You can use the same game only once every 2 weeks. You will get the full amount the games are valued, bundle or not bundle, but the games on the list cant be giving so often.
That would be for me the best way to stop this. Yes you can give 10 crazy machines game, but it will take you 6 months.
Same with bundles, so you dont get the price lowered but you are limited by how fast you can improve you CV using exploited games.
That Way I dont see people buyinh 20 bundles and waiting so much.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah the same thing has been stinging my mind like anything. Why RF:G and Darksiders 2 are not in bundle list and why are people unfairly getting so much contrib. I just hope it gets added soon, i tell you there will be too many complaints about contrib value readjusting ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
both Red Faction Armageddon and Darksiders 1 were in the THQ Humble bundle before and now they have been removed from the SG bundle games list. If they have not yet been marked as bundled then I guess they will never count as one. So you'll get full contribution by giving them away, just saying...
Comment has been collapsed.
They did that for HIB 1-3 which are on the bundle list.
There is no official reason as CG is the one and charge has hasn't bothered to say anything about. Best answer I got was Bundle list under different management, bundle keys were entirely forbidden before, people were trying to submit them as individual games to get more credit and there wasn't enough manpower to adequately police them on top of other support duties, take your pick. I don't think there is one good, solid answer, but these are all perfectly plausible. Just a change that happened somewhere down the line from a support member, but they are not the ones in charge of adding the games.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's the same as the Indie Gala Store bundles which are not included.
If this is added, all the Indie Gala Store bundles should be retroactively added. I do not think they have the information in order to date the bundles back to their first release and the fact that they haven't been added yet, makes me think these will not be added either.
I think both should have been added, but the community is not in charge.
Comment has been collapsed.
just do not care about the bundle and contrib system then you are happy^^
Comment has been collapsed.
I would call them bundle games, if a game goes into that weekly sale and someone tries to give that away in my group (which doesn't allow bundle games as the main giveaway, lots of people do extra giveaways with bundle games which is completely fine tho) I wouldn't allow it. Even if it hasn't been in any bundle except that, because I consider that to be kind of a bundle. I hope you get my point.
Comment has been collapsed.
283 Comments - Last post 31 minutes ago by moonlightdriver
65 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by entitygeorge
38 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by RCSWE
31 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by adam1224
53 Comments - Last post 12 hours ago by timmyfromspace
40 Comments - Last post 14 hours ago by Aerctaure
59 Comments - Last post 15 hours ago by Steamgifty
638 Comments - Last post 24 minutes ago by Fitz10024
1,462 Comments - Last post 39 minutes ago by tevemadar
35 Comments - Last post 43 minutes ago by PossiblePsycho
1,261 Comments - Last post 47 minutes ago by Ilan14
112 Comments - Last post 56 minutes ago by SilverSonic
49 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by coleypollockfilet
16,197 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by ChocolateVC
Its pay-what-you want and basically a bundle. Shouldn't the games in it count as bundled, as they are separate keys? Looking around the site I found someone who has farmed over $350 contributor value off this bundle alone.
Link to sale
Comment has been collapsed.