Now it's just a matter of time the other bundle sites adopt this. However not being able to share my bundle leftovers is a bit disappointing.
Comment has been collapsed.
This bundle was literally all games I was going to throw on my wishlist. I. Am. Jazzed.
Comment has been collapsed.
Considering Humble's policy has always been that the keys were for personal use only, this doesn't surprise me.
Comment has been collapsed.
I wasn't aware, thanks. Either way, it IS their policy, and people have been abusing it. I don't like it, and probably won't buy bundles with games I already own now, but eh. It is what it is.
Comment has been collapsed.
So I don't get keys for games that are already in my steam account, although I paid for them?
Comment has been collapsed.
You need to lighten up, amigo. If this makes you "mad", you will not last long in the real world...
For the price you're paying, even with a couple of games removed from the bundle, you're still getting a cracking deal...
Comment has been collapsed.
People paid for personal use.. look at the price paid for a bunch of games. You're telling me paying 1$ for 5-6 games should entitle you to give away keys to your friends and that it's bad otherwise.
People were breaking the rules for a long time and now that there's a way to enforce the rules you're gonna whine about it.. kinda pathetic.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well put it in perspective. Humble Bundle has been around for YEARS. We may be greedy, but having all of these cheap bundles year after year, we come to EXPECT bundles. So when our precious bundles have a major change like this, then we are gonna react. It'd be like if Steam changed something about their sales that made everyone mad. Would you say they're greedy? Probably not, since I bet you would be disappointed that they changed your precious sales in that way.
So cut them some slack why don't ya
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm pretty glad they put this feature in. It's a shame that people can't give away the extra keys, but when they could it resulted in traders which was against ToS anyway... If you really want it now, you'll have to buy it and considering it's cheap and for charity, it's not that bad.
I'm getting it later, can't wait to play me some worms.
Comment has been collapsed.
You can pay with Amazon, and there are two ways you can get Amazon money.
Coinstar. Coinstar is a kiosk that counts coins and gives you credit for the store it's in. Many of them will give you Amazon credit if you have $5 or more in change, and they will (or at least used to) waive the 10% coin counting fee.
Bing farming. If you use the Chrome web browser, there is an extension that automates the process. You get ~75 points to join and look at tutorials, and you can farm 16-17 points a day. Follow the plan to get a Silver account and then Gold (Gold requires you to save for 700—do it, it gives a permanent discount). With Gold (free to you, but takes a while, $5 in Amazon money costs 475 Bing points. When you're Gold, 475 points takes just under a month. That's basically $5 a month for a few seconds of your time every day (Bing is doing this to get their search engine to compete with Google in terms of usage). That will get you some of the bundles.
Comment has been collapsed.
the new system is going to cost them some sales when bundled dupes roll around as it will be harder to want to buy for just one game. that being said, doesn't really bother me other than making it slightly harder to decide to buy a bundle if I own some of the games.
Comment has been collapsed.
Let's be honest: Is it really that different from all-in-one-bundle-key ? People complain they can't share extra keys, but several times already there was one key for whole bundle, so you couldn't really share extra games anyway. The only difference is that now you won't see giveaways on steamgifts, but you still have Gift URLs. I don't see a problem here, especially if they're going to give so good bundles (seriously, I was going to buy Armageddon for 15$, and now this <3 )
The only real complain is that you can't download DRM-Free versions of these games, but again: that already happened in the past, so it's no big deal.
Comment has been collapsed.
If I get it right, you should be able to activate the games on different accounts, if you have more than one. I'm not sure, why you should have that, but it is still possible (in contrast to an all-in-one-bundle-key). I'm going to skip this bundle, but it sounds like a good solution.
Comment has been collapsed.
So if I buy a bundle, but I already own 1 of the games. I can no longer gift that to a friend or my gf's account? Yeah dude, real fucking fantastic.
Comment has been collapsed.
While that is an option, it's still going to piss off a lot of people. Correct me if I'm wrong, but HB is all about promoting indie games and helping charity right? Well why do they care where it goes after they have your cash? It's not like they're selling them at $20 a piece.
Comment has been collapsed.
Not really. HB is a profitable firm like any other. Supporting Indie Games & Charity yes :-)
They do not care where the keys go. But they do care if publishers will not go into an Hib because of all the keys flowing around the interwebs. So I totally disagree here with your opinion.
Comment has been collapsed.
While it is true HB want's money, I've never given them a dime, all the way back to HB3 using the little slider thing.
Never thought about the publishers, figured they didn't care that much if they were just tossing games out the window, whether they sit idle in someones inventory or joe dirt has 40 keys he's struggling to get rid of.
Comment has been collapsed.
To all the people saying "Aww yeh! I love this system!", you know you're cheering on the removal of customer benefit in exchange for their own profits right?
I'm sorry, but I don't care if it's a Steam "bundle", Humble, or anyone else - if I buy 5 games I should have access to 5 games. The fact that I've supported the devs in the past by buying their game shouldn't be a punishment when buying a bundle.
If I buy a collection of DVDs in a store I don't lose a movie because I already owned a copy. If I want to give my extra copy to a friend I have that option. Digital goods should be no different, buying a bundle with a game I already own means I now have two licenses of that software.
Failure to provide the product I purchase should be considered theft; only in the wishy-washy world of digital distribution would this ever fly.
Comment has been collapsed.
What also annoys me is how people don't see that the only reason why they do this is their own profit. If you can't share/trade/gift single games people are forced to buy the whole bundle if they want any of the games. And that is the only reason for all these changes. They didn't get enough money from it because people would trade/split bundles, so they made the one-key-for-all thing. The bta was sometimes too low for a great profit, so they made a fixed bta price. Too many people would only pay for the 1$ tier, so they decided to give bonus games only to bta buyers. They realized that most people are interested in spending money on Steam keys only, so they got rid of the DRM free 'we're cool Indie people' thing and saved bandwidth and server costs.
But no, it's all for charity of course. That's probably why Sequoia Capital, a well known charity organization, invested a few million dollars into Humble Inc..
They had fantastic deals and they still have good (and sometimes even fantastic) deals, but the whole PR nonsense about Humble being a super nice non-profit charity organization is annoying, especially if so many people blindly believe it. It's a business that uses charity for good PR (and no, I don't believe they're plain evil, they're certainly happy that the money helps those charity organizations as a side effect) to make even more money and nothing else.
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh I know! I hate that anytime criticism is voiced at Humble, there are a bunch of people who say "Stop trying to rip off charity!" or something to that effect.
Humble Inc. is a for-profit corporation. Yes, they share a portion of their income on charitable donations but find me a corporation that doesn't do this.
Comment has been collapsed.
Agree with this. People keep using the word "greedy" .. the fact of the matter is, if they had a prob with people paying $1, they could have it higher. Or don't offer as much for $1 tier. Most of HiBs are good and well worth the money. And I don't mind paying for them. BUt I EXPECT to get what I pay for. If the allowable cost is 1 cent and Im promised 10 games, I damn well better get a copy of each of the 10 games I was promised.
This isn't our fault. There are other measures in their pricing structure they could do.
Add to this though .. just a thought. The market is over-saturated in bundles now. When HiB first started, most people didn't have a problem spending BTA even if they didnt want the games. But now .. Just the last 48 hrs we got, Bundlestars, Indieroyale, Indiegala, Humble Bundle and Flying Bundle. 5 bundles! (Plus Groupies has an active bundle and IR just finished one)
The same people that bought those bundles before cannot afford to be paying top dollar for EVERY ONE.
Comment has been collapsed.
As long as you are aware that your concept of happiness if different than others's, whatever rocks your boat.
Comment has been collapsed.
Ah yes, this old gem. As stated above:
"Anytime criticism is voiced at Humble, there are a bunch of people who say "Stop trying to rip off charity!" or something to that effect.
Humble Inc. is a for-profit corporation. Yes, they share a portion of their income on charitable donations but find me a corporation that doesn't do this."
It doesn't matter if the price is $6 or $60, they are offering a set amount of games for a set price. I expect full access to the games I have paid for and I have the right, as a customer, to complain when they make decisions that I do not agree with. The new system is anti-consumer and borderline theft, and I'm not going to "just pay and be happy", regardless of the price or the fact that Humble Inc gives 15% to charity.
Comment has been collapsed.
How did you get that from my post at all? I have no issues with them being a for-profit company.
My issue is that whenever I have a complaint against said company, people will always rush out to defend them as some kind of saintly charity. They shouldn't be immune to criticism.
Comment has been collapsed.
No. They are not a charity. Just like how Microsoft donates millions to charity every year, Humble Inc. is a corporation that makes charitable contributions.
A firm like Sequoia Capital doesn't invest $4.7 Million into a charity. They are a business out to make money.
You think that Humble Tip is nothing? Most people leave the split as default, which is 15%. Bundles that sell $5 Million like HiB V and Humble THQ work out to $750000 worth of "tips". Almost every bundle they run nets them over $100000 in tips.
Comment has been collapsed.
Nah, not really. Your issue is that your complaint is purely based on a set of fallacies. Like comparing the bundles from HS to a DVD Collection.
The Humble Store is completely upfront with their terms of service, and yet some people tend to interpret those the way they like. "Expecting" something that was not even offered in the first place.
A bundle is a complete package. You purchase it for a single-person use (for yourself or as a gift). You do not get extra copies of already owned games. Yes, it is that simple.
You can spout out other colourful definitions akin to "anti-consumer" and "borderline theft", but that certainly is not criticism. That's whining. The fact of the matter is: they do not owe you something just because you expect to get it.
No one forces you to purchase any bundles, and if you want separate game keys/gift items for all the games "you pay for", just purchase them separately from stores that offer just that.
Do not like the offer? Do not accept it! It really is that simple.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm sorry, but since when is voicing criticism of bad practices not allowed? Yes, I could just "vote with my wallet" and say nothing, but last I checked this is a forum for discussion and that's what I'm doing.
Calling it "whining" in an attempt to brush off the criticism does little to help your rebuttal. Yes, it's a part of their ToS but since when is a ToS immune to criticism?
You may think the current system of buying a product and being denied access to it due to having previously owned a copy is awesome, and all the power to you if that's your stance. Clearly we disagree on this but I think it's great that you want companies to walk all over you after you buy something from them!
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, you openly call them thieves for not letting you have something you did not pay for.
By all means, continue discussing the ToS on the forum or wherever you like, this does not change the fact that they provide a certain service for a certain fee. You do not pay for five separate products that form a bundle, you pay for a single product - means of accessing the games via certain platforms. With no extra copies.
To put it bluntly, the answer to the question "since when is a ToS immune to criticism?" would be "since you accept this ToS and seal the deal". That high and mighty talk about letting companies walk over those who consciously agree to these terms is amusing, to say the least…
I admit it, I am biased towards Humble Bundle, Inc. because of all the great things they have done for the gaming community, delivering quality cross-platform DRM-free indie titles and pioneering the pay what you want bundle model that has been widely adopted in recent years.
If you want to talk about walking over you, try reading the Steam Subscriber Agreement. Break the rules, and your account gets suspended or terminated. Now, I love what Valve is doing in general, and I may be exaggerating this a little, but Humble with their DRM-free downloads (for offers that have them) is one of the last companies to be accused of denying access to your "purchased products".
If you are indeed willing to discuss or criticize, please be prepared to bring in valid arguments defending your stand. I honestly find that whole "Hate their terms, but will buy 'cause it's a steal, and who are they to make the rules here!" reasoning a bit weak.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't understand how I did not pay for the games in the bundle? They were selling X amount of games for a set price, and then refused to deliver some of the games because I had decided to support the devs in the past. This is my punishment for supporting indies I suppose.
If I buy a bundle of games from Amazon they deliver me the games I paid for. They don't ask "Oh wait, do you already own some of these? Because if you do then fuck off".
Are the devs of these "duplicate" games not being paid their share of the purchase? I somehow doubt this. So, a store is saying they are selling me X number of games, taking full payment for the products and paying the developers for the sale... and then they deliver nothing.
How is this not theft?
To be clear, I did NOT purchase this bundle (go ahead and check my library) so please do not insinuate that I am a hypocrite. It seems like you were quick to dismiss everything I said because you assume I am criticizing a ToS after agreeing to it, which is not the case.
As well, I'm not sure where your whole rant about Steam's ToS came from in this discussion. Yes, it may have it's flaws but this is a discussion thread about Humble Bundle. Another company's perceived shortcomings do not excuse Humble's flawed ToS and anti-consumer policies.
Comment has been collapsed.
If you buy a bundle from Amazon, you buy a pack of games from Amazon. And you pay the fixed price. With no options.
If you buy a bundle from Humble, you can opt to pay less if you already have any of games from the bundle. You can opt to pay more and even specify where the money will go: to support a specific developer (which for some reason you consider a punishment) or go with the charity. It is a flexible offer. Not a DVD Boxset with a discounted price tag. Even if you tend to automatically value the bundle offers by their minimum/bonus prices.
I apologize if you were offended by the assumption that you already have this bundle purchased. The point I am trying to get through here is that people (including yourself) base their demands and expectations on something that is not initially offered to them. There is no Boxset. You have to actually understand what is being set up for sale before voicing theft accusations and calling it anti-consumerism.
The entire denying access to what you have bought notion is off. You are not suddenly prohibited from getting to the content that you already own (remember the Steam account termination example - that id denying access), but you do not get additional copies.
Unless, of course, you're not buying the original Humble Indie Bundles that give you DRM-free game packages (which are still technically only for your single-person usage).
So, please, do tell me, where is the flaw in being able to purchase even a single game for a tenth (idk… fifth) of its price? Is it that it is no longer a bundle that way and should be stripped of this title?
Comment has been collapsed.
I know they are not denying me access to the game I already own, that would be absurd. What they are denying me access to is the 2nd license I am purchasing when I buy the bundle.
When I pay my $6, Humble is ready to provide me with brand new licenses for all the games in the bundle. They have a stock of keys from the devs, and my purchase secures me one of each game. If I had a brand new account with zero games, this is exactly what they would give me.
So why is it that if I have previously purchased half of these games that I am all of a sudden no longer entitled to all of the licenses I just paid for? Because I bought (likely for much more money) some of these games in the past? Humble is now only providing me with half of the keys that had been reserved for me when I initially made my payment. Why do they get to keep the key/license that I just paid for?
Humble gets it's share, the dev gets their share, and I get nothing?
Yes, the price is low so it's easy to just look at it being 3 games for $6 rather than 5 (as an example) but for me it's the principal that irks me. The actual dollar amount is irrelevant, I just dislike the idea of being denied a 2nd copy of the media I just purchased.
Also, just to be clear, I'm not saying that your point of view is incorrect. I am simply voicing my dissatisfaction with the practices above, but these are just my opinions on the matter. I respect the fact that your opinions may differ, and I am not trying to change your mind on the matter. That said, please realize that while I understand what you are saying I am unlikely to change my stance any time soon :)
Comment has been collapsed.
Very well written. Much better than I could've stated it.
+1
Comment has been collapsed.
I understand your dissatisfaction, and have nothing against it. While I do disagree with some points (you can check my other comments below on that matter, key notes: you buy licenses for yourself, and nothing still prevents you from getting those licenses if you link a different Steam account that you own), the main thing I am opposing here is that you call what Humble Bundle does "thievery".
Comment has been collapsed.
<sarcasm>
No, I can think of no reason whatsoever to expect you would actually receive all the games in a bundle that advertises all the games in it as being part of one bundle. You're clearly so entitled, thinking you'll receive copies of every game in a bundle.
</sarcasm>
Comment has been collapsed.
Cool story.
Except they are not selling you copies of the games. They are granting you (personally) with a license to access this game through certain means. What difference does it make if you cannot redeem a copy on your account that already has this copy (and you can redeem it on a different account by linking it through HS)?
Oh, I know. You now cannot give the key away. Well, that sucks.
Comment has been collapsed.
so how does one create a giveaway with this new system
Comment has been collapsed.
By giving away the whole bundle once it's been set up on Steamgifts. IIRC, this usually happens a few days after the bundle is withdrawn from sale :)
Comment has been collapsed.
I'd rather they do this than bundle keys together.
I don't like it, but the last few Humble Bundles have been pretty lousy, IMO. If they're going to do this, and then start offering good games again, I suppose it's a small price to pay.
If you want to gift to a local friend, I think you can. Not sure how it works—someone will have to try and confirm. First, go to PortableApps.com, look up your favorite browser. They have Firefox, and also Chrome or Opera if you like those, and some lesser known ones like Maxthon. No IE or Safari, this is a legal site and altering those browsers would be illegal. Now install your portable browser on a flash drive. On your own computer, login to Humble, but not Steam. Go to friend's house. Open Humble, pull up the game. Click the game. Steam opens. Your friend logs into Steam. Delete the \data folder on the flash drive under the browser's directory (e.g. FirefoxPortable). This completely resets the app, and it means you don't take your friend's Steam login home.
I think that will work because Steam lets third party sites (like Steamgifts) log you into Steam. If Humble wanted to, they could do the same. But I think they want to neuter Internet giveaways, while allowing local ones. In that sense, if that is their intention, it is a brilliant move.
Now, on the other hand, if it's just Humble being greedy and the bundles will continue to suck... well, there are other bundle groups out there.
Comment has been collapsed.
This reminds me of back when they had one key per all games, which they eventually stopped doing.
Screw them for telling me what I can and can't do with games I pay for. I hated that system because it cluttered my Steam library with games I didn't want. In past bundles I would give the spare keys for games I already own to friends, because damn it I paid for those keys and that is damn well my prerogative and right. Yes, their TOS asks you not to, but so what? Origin's TOS says it can snoop in my private files, that didn't stop me from putting it in a sandbox where it can't do that. I hate it when Steam does the same thing when they sell bundles - you don't get spare copies of the games you already own, you just lose them, thus decreasing their value and thus ultimately punishing you for being a repeat customer. Besides, Humble has had the same games in multiple bundles before. Why should I buy the next Humble Bundle when it'll just be the BTA week two unlock bonus* for the bundle after that?
I think they've forgotten exactly why they were called the humble bundle to begin with. Let's not forget that name came about because they wanted to avoid the consumer-punishing bullshit other corporations give you to protect their bottom line and revenue. Why not just give us a Humble DLC at this point? You're doing the same thing, right? Implementing a system that annoys customers in the name of preventing game sharing? (and don't give me 'resale' as an excuse, that's no different than the RIAA and MPAA pretending the majority of private torrenters profit off of it.).
And the delayed bonuses I mentioned above are really freaking annoying. They're not "bonus games" they're blind sales. It's fine if they, say, retroactively add keys for DRM-free games subsequently Greenlit, or games that they only negotiated the inclusion of belatedly for whatever reason, but don't arbitrarily withhold a game I already paid for for two weeks for no reason (usually making me come back and check your site repeatedly in the process - yeah, that's subtle), and don't try to force me to buy a game before I know what it is!
Comment has been collapsed.
To your comment about the delayed bonuses. It was always like that. I think it's mostly to push people on the edge of buying it/giving people something to look forward to during that humble bundle. I like the one week thing.
Though is kinda lame early buyers no longer get them. And I feel like them saying "BONUSES NEXT WEEK" kinda ruined the fun of it just magically being added.
Comment has been collapsed.
Early buyers no longer get them? Where did you hear that? And yeah, they were "bonuses" when they were surprisingly generous additions, but when you do it every single time they go from bonuses to just an expected part of the bundle, and I think blind sales are crap.
Screw that - Humble's competition treats their customers much better. Humble's last bundles have all been crap or games that have already been out for a while (the downside to targeting high-profile indie games is that people already own them!) and their policies are honestly ridiculous. When Gala, for example, has you buy early, they give you bonus credit, the new games for free BTA or no, and four for the price of one on gift copies for their "happy hour" sales. Oh, and they don't have customer-authentication account-linking bullshit, they give you straight up keys, and their devs have stated in the past that they don't care what you do with the keys because you own them.
Comment has been collapsed.
"Early buyers no longer get them? Where did you hear that?". Been like that for awhile. People who didn't BTA used to be able to get the bonuses that were added. A month or two ago they added "beat the average to get the bonus games next week."
Also wouldn't be too shocked if other companies followed what humble bundle did.
Indie gala copied them a lot.
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh, how I love all those complaints. It really sounds like the Humble team broke into your house, killed the dog, and sold you a bunch of games along the way that you are now doomed to live with.
At least you know about the existence of their TOS. That's reassuring.
Comment has been collapsed.
Wow, you're impressively condescending.
Do you have any actual reply to literally any of my points, other than baseless and pointless condescension?
Comment has been collapsed.
Why should I even try?
From all that I read in your comments in this thread you won't really listen to reason. You keep flashing about your sacred "Customer" status, completely neglecting the terms that grant you this status. Pay a buck, and the whole world owes you. Now that's pointless condescension AND ignorance.
You can check my comments above on the "I've paid for all the keys in the bundle, I must have them" discussion with ageofarmageddon, they cover some of your… points, but, please, do not expect me to answer to remarks such as "don't try to force me to buy a game before I know what it is!" with something other than laughter. It's like they really shoved a gun into your face and made you purchase those. Hilarious.
Comment has been collapsed.
So let's see, expecting us to buy bundles that don't tell us what's actually in them is not making us buy games before we know what they are? And it's wrong to expect to actually receive all the things I pay for? And as long as the TOS says it, you have no right whatsoever to complain for any reason because the sacred TOS says it?
You sound a lot like those big-name publishers who think gamers are "entitled" when they ask for basic consideration as consumers.
I don't care if it's "a buck" or a thousand dollars or what - the way their service is set up seems explicitly designed to deprive me of products I paid money for, and that's something that will certainly discourage sales in the future from me. If expecting to receive the things I pay for is being "entitled" then yeah, I'm "entitled" - same reason I don't buy Steam's bundles, you don't get copies of things you already own (nor do you get discounts to compensate...meaning you don't get them but still pay for them!) I'm so entitled, expecting to actually receive items I purchase.
And no, I'm not searching around half the thread to find your remarks to other people. Don't make excuses for being lazy and condescending. If you didn't want to talk about the issue again you shouldn't reply to other people with it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Highlights:
If you go and purchase something you do not even bother to understand and then publicly complain about that, do not be surprised when your complaints are ridiculed. Because they look ridiculous.
Cluttering the Steam library… chuckle
Comment has been collapsed.
Hmm, so it's gone from "We don't tell you what you're purchasing and if you already own the secret bonus game, you're screwed out of content you paid for" to "You don't bother to understand it"? Really?
And sometimes, the answer to your "love it or leave it" logic is, indeed, to leave it - I restate my original position of "Screw these guys, their competitors treat me better." Gala has the exact same ToS (literally, their original ToS was outright copied and pasted), and they've explicitly stated that sharing individual keys counts as "personal use" because they're your keys that you legally purchased and paid for.
As I said before, if they're going to screw customers out of value (make you pay the same price, but receive different amounts of products) via technical schemes designed to prevent people from reselling or sharing games with other people, how is that better than, or indeed any different from, using DRM? Are they not using Steam as a form of DRM in this instance? And if so, doesn't that go against their early promise not to use DRM - indeed where the term "humble bundle" comes from?
Now please, actually make the attempt to explain why these complaints are ridiculous, rather than propping strawmen and responding with silly levels of condescension. I disagree with your apparent belief that it's somehow against the rules for past customers to complain that changes in policies affect them negatively.
Comment has been collapsed.
Is it really that hard to understand the offer?
They display the games that are bundled. They let you set the price. They throw in extras.
And then you feel ripped off, because you already had the bonus game in your possession.
Or not… because it's a bonus.
You are not "screwed out of content you paid for", you already have this content!
The Humble Indie Bundles which started this all are still held as regular events, introducing many gems to the platforms that were neglected previously and providing a DRM-free download option.
The Weekly Sales are a different offer, not replacing, but adding diversity. Extending the product line, so to speak. Yes, they have been tied to Steam, but, once again, you get what you pay for. You are not robbed of your hard-earned money. You agree to play by the rules, and then complain when they try to prevent you from breaking them.
Screwing customers out of value? Please. You set the price, you even have control of whom to direct the payment to. It's not "pay the minimum of $1" or "beat the average by 1 cent". Well, technically, it is "pay what you want", but people tend to abuse this offer too much. It is a sale, after all.
I get it, you like what Humble's competitors offer, however, saying that Gala's ToS is exactly the same BUT allows gifting keys is absurd. Because, guess what, you've just pointed out the crucial difference.
What I do not get is why people demand what they expect, pulling the expectations out of nowhere, and then blame those who they expect it from for not delivering. The complaints of a spoilt child.
Of course it is not against the rules to complain, yet you are complaining about losing something that never was there in the first place. Customers are only customers when they abide by the rules of the establishment. If you do not care about the ToS, and Humble in general, do not expect care in return.
Do not be jealous just because a certain sale is not crafted for you specifically. There is absolutely no sane reason to buy every bundle out there.
Luckily, you have the freedom of choice.
Which also leaves me with freedom to be condescending. Pointless, maybe, but hardly baseless now, after you have proven my words from the second response in this thread.
Comment has been collapsed.
How have we gone from "I think this officer is unfair, robs paying customers of value, and against the original spirit of the organization" to "I don't understand how this offer works."? Acting as though anyone who disagrees with you just doesn't understand how "it" (business, life, consumerism, the Internet, terms of use, the law, etc) works is a really, really cheap and condescending way of attempting to attack criticism without really offering anything new. As is calling people "spoilt", "jealous", uncaring, abusive, cheap or so on. Really - does the name-calling help you in some fashion? Does it make you feel better? Is it really called for and necessary?
If you're going to argue against strawmen, why even bother? It's not very persuasive to attack arguments you prop up just to attack them. I'm not asking them to do anything new. I'm saying they shouldn't change how they were already doing it. As for "you agreed to play by their rules," does that make it okay when companies like EA and Ubisoft make agreeing to submit to spyware and intrusive DRM schemes a condition of playing their games? Because that was my (ignored) point earlier. And does this mean I have no place or standing to complain when they change those rules? Speaking of rules, you misinterepreted what I was saying - Gala's TOS isn't "the same as Humble Bundle's, except they allow sharing." It's "the same as Humble Bundle's", and this doesn't preclude giving games away in either case. They literally copied and pasted Humble's TOS, yet they've always allowed you access to all the games you paid for.
And besides, just because a TOS says not to do something doesn't make it either morally wrong or illegal - if I buy a copy of a game I will damn well give that copy to whoever I please under whatever terms I please, so long as I don't make copies of my own (violating copyright). Is it really so wrong that I give "spare" games that I already own to friends who don't, so that I can enjoy it with them? Is that wish really worth screwing customers over and getting condescended and chewed out? Really? Giving people games I paid for is worth all that? That's a big part of why I've bought so many indie bundles in the past. Is that really so spoilt and entitled of me? Really? I'm not "splitting" bundles (giving away the Steam/Desura/etc keys while using the DRM-free download links, or vice-versa, thus creating two or more copies from one, which is definitely against their TOS). I'm not pirating anything. I'm buying a product and choosing to give it to someone else, and I resent the notion that that is anyone's business but my own.
As for your apparent belief that this is always how it's been done, this is actually a new thing - and so it doesn't "come out of nowhere". I'm not asking them to change anything to fit my expectations - i.e. "to be crafted for me specifically" - but rather to keep doing what made them cool in the first place; that is, to not change. Asking them to do what they were already doing is "pulling expectations out of nowhere" now? In what way?
It's not the complaint of a "spoilt child" that they make things more inconvenient and less valuable to consumers in the interests of attacking abusers. If it were, their entire stance against DRM is just as spoilt and childish, is it not? I like how you failed to answer my point entirely about Steam and DRM, and DRM being counter to their original goal. I also like how you confuse value with price - they're not the same. Let me explain:
When I say customers are screwed out of value, I mean that some people get, oh, say, 2 games out of a bundle, and other customers paying the exact same price for the exact same bundle under the exact same terms might get 5. Thus, two different customers, despite being charged the same price, get two different things for the same price. Value is not the same as price. Why should I get two games if you can get five, in the same bundle, under the same terms - and my copies of the remaining games are simply thrown away, being wasted cash, even if I wanted them? And why should I be expected to pay the same amount for less content? It stopped being truly "pay what you want" when the average price was used to withhold the majority of any given bundle - if I actually want the full bundle, there Is a minimum price that I have to meet even though I might get less than other people paying the exact same amount, and that's unfair. Not the "beat the average to receive X" part, but the "even if you beat the average you won't necessarily receive X" part.
I like how you totally failed to really address the point about intentionally withholding what you already paid for just to build anticipation or whatever, but besides that, it's still advertising a "bonus" that they might end up not giving me at all, whatsoever. It's withholding information I would rationally expect to have while making a purchase decision (pretty much the most basic question there is, "What am I purchasing?") How many times has the "bonus" been a past Humble Bundle? Plenty of times. Under these terms, those "bonuses" would be pretty much big screw-yous to customers who bought early. As for "bonuses," they're advertised from the start, i.e. "more games unlock in the second week." That's how it's always been done. If you advertise them as being a part of the sale, it doesn't matter if you call them "bonuses," it's still pretty absurd to outright refuse to give them to the people who paid for them, and then call them spoilt for wanting the product they paid for!
That's all I want. I want to receive all of the products that I paid for. When a company I've been a customer of in the past comes out and says they won't necessarily give me everything I've paid for because of policy, yes, I complain about that. I used to get all the products I paid for, and now I don't necessarily get all the products I paid for. Wanting to receive the products I paid for is jealousy? Is being spoilt? Through some mental gymnastics you have translated this into me asking for something "that was never there in the first place." Really? How do you figure?
I realize I'm getting repetitive but I honestly cannot stress enough that you're arguing that it's okay for companies to knowingly and intentionally not give customers the products they paid money for, because their FAQ says so and if you don't like it you can just git out. I don't care if it's a copy of a game I already own - that's still a copy I paid for and damn well expect to receive. What will I do with it? That's my business - after all, I paid for it. And hey, if you're going to attack straw men, don't bother replying. It's getting really old.
Comment has been collapsed.
If you feel repetitive, imagine how I must feel…
"I think this officer is unfair, robs paying customers of value, and against the original spirit of the organization"
OK, you think that. I cannot refute the fact that you actually think that. I am only pointing out why what you think is wrong, but you proclaim my arguments a war with straw men.
I'm not asking them to do anything new. I'm saying they shouldn't change how they were already doing it.
You are asking them to not interfere with your habit of breaking the agreement on which they provide you their service in the first place.
"As for "you agreed to play by their rules," does that make it okay when companies like EA and Ubisoft make agreeing to submit to spyware and intrusive DRM schemes a condition of playing their games?"
Sorry, I ignored that one earlier. Actually, YES. I do think that if you want to legally receive a certain service you have to agree to the terms that provide you with it. Or seek for an alternative service or alternative content. You cannot break the agreement just based on the fact that you WANT something, but feel that the agreement is ridiculous, thus is not worth adhering to.
And does this mean I have no place or standing to complain when they change those rules?
They only changed the redeeming process, not the rules. Thus preventing you from exploiting them. So you are complaining that it is now harder to break the rules?
They literally copied and pasted Humble's TOS, yet they've always allowed you access to all the games you paid for.
That's because the Services provided are different. Even if you want to call them same. They are different. Different companies, different services.
And besides, just because a TOS says not to do something doesn't make it either morally wrong or illegal - if I buy a copy of a game I will damn well give that copy to whoever I please under whatever terms I please, so long as I don't make copies of my own (violating copyright).
It does not break the law, but it does break the terms that you agreed on with the Service provider. You do not buy copies of the game, you buy personal licenses for yourself to access the games.
If you want to buy copies of the games, then do just that. It has nothing to do with Humble Bundle.
Is it really so wrong that I give "spare" games that I already own to friends who don't, so that I can enjoy it with them?
That's what the gift option is for. And by doing that you are exactly…
I'm not "splitting" bundles
Because the definition you provide further in brackets is completely wrong.
If it were, their entire stance against DRM is just as spoilt and childish, is it not? I like how you failed to answer my point entirely about Steam and DRM, and DRM being counter to their original goal.
The regular DRM-free bundles have not gone anyway. On previous terms. The weekly sales are just another chance to get something extra.
It's not the complaint of a "spoilt child" that they make things more inconvenient and less valuable to consumers in the interests of attacking abusers.
Yes it is. You basically are complaining that you can no longer do as you please and grab cheap extra copies of games. Many regular customers are happy with this innovation, because the redemption process has been simplified.
When I say customers are screwed out of value, I mean that some people get, oh, say, 2 games out of a bundle, and other customers paying the exact same price for the exact same bundle under the exact same terms might get 5. Thus, two different customers, despite being charged the same price, get two different things for the same price.
All-inclusive hotels and all-you-can-eat buffets come to mind. Yes, people sometimes get different value for their money. That's not unfair, that's the agreement. If you take out a whole bag of food from the latter to give it to your friends, you may get stopped at the exit. Are they denying you the right to get what you paid for?
Why should I get two games if you can get five, in the same bundle, under the same terms - and my copies of the remaining games are simply thrown away, being wasted cash, even if I wanted them?
Really, why should you? Do not. Also, the "minimum" price is not the "recommended" price only because you decide to get the games cheap. If you want to get the games separately, get them. Or find the offer where you will be sold separate games for the same price.
How many times has the "bonus" been a past Humble Bundle? Plenty of times. Under these terms, those "bonuses" would be pretty much big screw-yous to customers who bought early.… etc
Now you are complaining about first getting excited about a prospect of receiving another game for the same minimal price, but then feeling frustration as your expectations were not met. Really? The bundle is well worth it from the start.
Also, giving a previous bundle as a gift is bad now. Because someone did not pay as much for it as you did, but still got it. Really mature.
That's all I want. I want to receive all of the products that I paid for.
If you want to do that, please first check what exactly you are buying. You are not paying for separate copies of the game in form of game keys, hence you are not getting them.
It's withholding information I would rationally expect to have while making a purchase decision (pretty much the most basic question there is, "What am I purchasing?")
And this information is not hidden from you. It is right there on their website.
That's my business - after all, I paid for it.
Yeah, yeah… I heard that one already. And you got my response earlier. You think the world owes you something. You threw cash at them, and now they are expected to please you however you wish.
it's okay for companies to knowingly and intentionally not give customers the products they paid money for, because their FAQ says so and if you don't like it you can just git out.
Yes.
Customers should first knowingly and intentionally make an educated decision about their purchase. It is the FAQ, dammit. They do not hide anything from you.
If you are not sure whether you should have made this purchase in the first place, opt for a refund. Your dollar will fly right back at you. Oh, the entitled one.
Comment has been collapsed.
"You think the world owes you something..."
No, I think the business I'm doing business with owes me the products and services I paid for. I don't care if I paid for a license to play a game, why can I not transfer that license to someone else if I have no use for it and have not used it up? Oh, because they say so? Well, that sure is a convincing argument. And when people ignore that convincing argument, they turn around and implement technical schemes to force people to use it or waste it - sounds like DRM to me!
But let's consider the implications of your apparent belief that Humble's terms of service explicitly outlaw giving away the keys you purchase from them. If this is true, then this is true of Indie Gala, too, because their TOS is a direct copy of Humble's - it includes the "distributing [...] any part of the Service" clause you're fond of quoting. Nevermind that Gala does allow it, because they have a clause that you say doesn't allow it. Maybe because they're Italian, the English language applies to them differently? I dunno. Anyway, this part of the ToS denies the customer the right to give away the Steam keys purchased in the bundle? Gee, I sure hope that copy of Demigod you won wasn't from the Indie Gala Colossus pack (judging from how many games in that user's giveaways come from Gala's bundles, I'd be surprised.)...
Now, I just cannot wrap my head around why you think it's somehow a bad thing to expect, or demand, the goods and services you pay for. If that makes me entitled - wait, you know what? Paying an agreed amount of money to purchase a good or service actually does make me entitled to that good or service! So...yep! I feel like I'm entitled to the things I pay for. You may freely call me as entitled as you wish. Doing mental gymnastics and writing up legal technicalities to justify it doesn't change the fact that you're finding justifications for not giving me copies of the games I paid for (or keys that convey licenses to redeem copies with Steam, if you want to be that freaking facetious - they still USED to give me this and now do not, and that is why I'm upset.)
Comment has been collapsed.
I never thought it is bad to demand something you paid for. In fact, I am only for it. But, really, that's not the only thing you cannot wrap your head around.
The fact that they have previously provided you with keys to get access to the games in a bundle does not automatically allow you to redistribute them. Gala's Service may allow you to redistribute keys, Humble's does not. Yes, because they say so. You keep saying you have paid for copies of the games, or keys. Nope, you did not.
If you want to have all the games without losing the bundle's value - redeem them from another Steam account. If you want to gift any to a friend, buy a gift, for Pete's sake, or link your friend's Steam to the Humble account (if you still desire to continue the I-don't-care-about-no-rules approach), just don't complain that they are robbing you. Because they are not.
Oh, and nice detective work there pointing out me winning a potentially bundled game giveaway. Let us all hope, for everybody's sake, that this key did not come from a service that restricts their redistribution. Otherwise I'M SCREWED.
Comment has been collapsed.
Does it not? It does have the clause you pointed to as precluding distributing bundled keys. After all, the person who gave it away did not pay for that copy of the game, by your logic.
Comment has been collapsed.
Hey, let's forget all the other arguments, overlook the fact that you swore up and down that this is bad and illegal and Humble desperately wants to stop it: I hate to say I told you so, but sometimes... I told you so.
I'm satisfied. I still prefer the key system, but whatever, this is what I was worried about and since they still preserve the ability to save keys you don't intend to use, I've no further issue about it. Glad to see they have some sense in them. I guess I'll go back to "grabbing extra keys on the cheap" and "doing what I please" and being an entitled spoiled jealous ignorant thief who is abusively pretending that Humble intends to allow us to share our products we paid for with friends.
Comment has been collapsed.
@cicyractu
https://www.humblebundle.com/terms
Please indicate the parts of the terms that specifically prevent the redistribution of a purchased key. Personal use does not preclude that. Further, first sale doctrine is one of the guarantees of personal use rights. As such giving ones' extra keys to another Steam account you personally own, or brother, sister, random stranger, or even selling them is actually protected.
Again, where in the Terms can you find "no extra copies"? I could not find that anywhere in the terms. Are you randomly pulling stuff into the terms from other parts of the site? You can find that note on bundles where multiple products fall under a single key. However, there the issue is Steam, not Humble Bundle Inc preventing you from receiving all of the product purchased.
This new policy puts Humble Bundle Inc as actively handling the keys and actively denying you part of the purchase you paid for just because you happen to own that item already. As has already been pointed out that is wrong and may even be on the border of illegal. Before they could get away with it as they were not the one's actively preventing the use of the license purchased but rather the 3rd party (Steam) by not having am mechanism to split license from keys and no resale there. The current/new policy has Humble Bundle agreeing to sell you licenses for Products X,Y,& Z, but then after you've paid them, they retroactively look at your account and say "We aren't going to give you a license for Y because you already own Y." Much different when they provided a single unlock key that covered multiple products (thus still delivered you a license) because they were not the people denying use of the of that license. Now Humble Bundle Inc is actively selling a product, then looking and deciding if they should or should not give you a license (after they've already agreed to and been paid for that license). Since Humble Bundle Inc is actively controlling the redemption and distribution of licenses during their redemption process they should be providing a key for any items already owned, or a giftable copy. Anything less puts the legal burden of having failed to deliver all of the product paid for directly with Humble Bundle Inc.
Comment has been collapsed.
Please indicate the parts of the terms that specifically prevent the redistribution of a purchased key.
Try the first restriction. Distribution and disclosing any part of the Service.
Are you randomly pulling stuff into the terms from other parts of the site?
But of course, because ToS outline the rules and "no extra copies" is the way the Service is provided. ToS also explicitly point to other agreements with the third parties that provide means of accessing the content, Steam, in this case.
However, there the issue is Steam, not Humble Bundle Inc preventing you from receiving all of the product purchased.
New system allows you to link/unlink your own personal Steam accounts to redeem the licenses.
Since Humble Bundle Inc is actively controlling the redemption and distribution of licenses during their redemption process they should be providing a key for any items already owned, or a giftable copy. Anything less puts the legal burden of having failed to deliver all of the product paid for directly with Humble Bundle Inc.
See above. In case you want to have the games redeemed on a different personal account that you own, link this account and just do it. In case you do not have a different personal account, but already have the games on it, you do not get extra giftable copies, you already have access to the game.
Yes, I get it, I am clearly at a disadvantage here on SteamGifts, where people are ready to kill and get killed for objectified game licenses, but you refuse to accept one simple thing: Humble Bundle is not selling you KEYS.
Comment has been collapsed.
14 Comments - Last post 27 seconds ago by scap
611 Comments - Last post 50 minutes ago by MeguminShiro
44 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by xeos23
17,321 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by Carenard
232 Comments - Last post 7 hours ago by Reidor
47,462 Comments - Last post 8 hours ago by pizzahut
3,257 Comments - Last post 9 hours ago by MeguminShiro
348 Comments - Last post 5 minutes ago by NumBerSEVEN
91 Comments - Last post 6 minutes ago by MaryVirgin
110 Comments - Last post 31 minutes ago by vinirockman
1,729 Comments - Last post 49 minutes ago by Delisper
163 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Ch1cWolf
281 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by Fallador
10 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by SaPOWrra
$1
Worms Armageddon
Worms Blast
Worms Ultimate Mayhem
Worms Pinball
Worms Crazy Golf
Superfrog HD
$6
Alien Breed: Impact
Alien Breed 2: Assault
Alien Breed 3: Descent
Worms Revolution Gold (with all DLC)
Note: Alien Breed Games are 1 key.
Clicky
WARNING: No more cd keys, you have to connect to Steam to redeem the games.
Comment has been collapsed.