second question's broke
so most of its unanswerable
Comment has been collapsed.
Should wanr anyone it requires $30 contributor, but it didn't take me too long so Im not complaining. Thanks for generosity and bump for solved.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks for being a total dick and putting contributor value on a puzzle and not even mentioning it on the main thread. Puzzles shouldn't have contributor value anyways, but not even mentioning it is the worst.
Comment has been collapsed.
1) I give games to friends of mine, because out here I get called a leecher and get many a shit. I only have 1 account, so I wouldn't join it multiple times.
2) As previously stated, I don't like to give away games on here, so I can't make puzzles. I still can hate the fact that you put contributor value on a puzzle giveaway. You are dedicating time to solve the puzzle, so why do you need to add a second barrier on top of the puzzle. Not even mentioning it in the thread is the biggest violation. I solved the entire puzzle, later to find out that it has contributor value required.
3) Stop judging people based on the giveaways on their profile. Dropping keys gets instant and honest responses instead of the generic and brainless "thanks!". Also, the contributor system is completely broken. With the community of people that judge a book by it's profile like you, you shouldn't be suprised that I don't give away games on here regularly.
Comment has been collapsed.
It may be an unwritten rule to not have contributor value on puzzles (although I've seen a couple dozen in my short time here that do) and it is a courtesy to state that there is a contributor value on the GA.
However you can state that without resorting to insults.
Comment has been collapsed.
Sorry, I just get angry when I took time to solve a puzzle and I end up with a giveaway that I can't enter.
Comment has been collapsed.
I give games to people that like me and don't call me a dick for "leeching". Most of them I found in SG chatrooms and on the forums while solving puzzles. And whenever I win something, I either end up chatting with the person who was nice enough to give away the game, or just write them a friendly thank you email if they don't want to chat.
Also, why would leeching be such a bad thing? Isn't this site about giving games to those who can't afford them? Contributor values is here to thank those who are nice enough to give away games, but you shouldn't just be giving to those who give away too, and leave the people who can't access games in the cold.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm probably on quite some blacklists already, because of the opinions I share. If I was really that offensive, then I'm sorry, but I feel like I deserved to get mad at him because he made a puzzle with contributor value required, yet he didn't mention it, which meant I put time into solving a puzzle for nothing.
Comment has been collapsed.
While I understand you frustration, people won't sympathise with you if you post insults. Before I start solving any puzzle, I always check the creator's profile first to make sure that I meet the contribution value. It is nice when contribution required is mentioned in the OP, but you can always check for yourself :)
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, contributor value on puzzles and not mentioning it has become more common (sadly), so maybe I should start checking people's profile, but I try so many puzzles and SG has been so slow lately, it would be almost unmanagable.
Comment has been collapsed.
Who makes the rules that Puzzles giveaway can't have contributor value? never seen that.. as long as the Value is understandable and i guess it's alright.. for god damn sake you could even check the CV of a private giveaway.. all it takes is just a little sneak peak to his profile.. by looking at the number and solvers + the entries you could guess which GA is it if he have multiple Private GA at the same time.. lol.. just pay a little respect.. at least he wanted to giveaway something..
Comment has been collapsed.
It's kind of an unwritten rule that puzzle giveaways don't have contributor value, so I usually don't check the contributor value. Even if they add contributor value, they could at least be nice enough to mention it in the thread, now I've wasted time solving the puzzle and I've gotten all mad.
Also, the 30.01$ value isn't understandable to me, so still, it wouldn't be all right, but if he mentioned it I would have just skipped this puzzle
Comment has been collapsed.
30.01$ is not so bad.. give out some indie games u will reach 30$ in no time.. and give 1 real games.. it will break you through that numbers xD...
well u should learn my habbit then.. checking CV of the giveaway before starting working on the puzzle.. lol...
Comment has been collapsed.
yeah, but I don't get why giving away indie games is so bad. I mostly play indie games, and I'd love to give them away, yet I wouldn't be able to get contrib value over 30$ for it. Even if I liked the SG community and were to give away a full bundle, I'd split it into seperate giveaways so I could share the fun with more people. I could give away a small DLC or a game that's on sale, but that would mean I'd be giving away games that I don't want myself and giving games that are in my eyes bad.
I understand that the limit is there so that you couldn't just farm contrib value from bundles, but if you're going to limit games based on sales, you should also limit regular sales on steam.
Comment has been collapsed.
prob because price of bundles is way down from the real price.. that's why they limit it.. unless people will just buy like a bunch of bundles and Give them all away which will get you over 1000+ Contrib value.. @_@
well it's their logic xD just accept it :P
Comment has been collapsed.
But so are the games sold on steam itself and other online retailers that sell steam codes. There are also people who "farm" contributor value by buying a ton of games on steam or amazon that have huge discounts, yet they don't get limited. I wouldn't really call it logic. Just because the other possibilities are just way too hard to implement, they stick to the old and broken system
Comment has been collapsed.
Apparently, you weren't able to post bundle game giveaways on here because of this reason. Still, if you're going to allow it, at least allow it in a reasonable manner. Besides the system being unfair and broken, it also kicks new people on the site in the balls very often, because it's hidden inside the faq which is completely on the bottom of the site.
Also, I just checked the FAQ, and the bundle system is in the FAQ, which you wouldn't even bother to check unless you have a problem. They lure people into giving away complete bundles, and they get shit when they complain about it.
Comment has been collapsed.
While I totally agree with you, you should have phrased it in a better way. They can put contributor value on their puzzle so long as they mention it. No one wants to spend time on a puzzle only to find out that they haven't reached the required contributor value for it. Common courtesy.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes I could, apologies are above. I still believe you shouldn't put contrib value on a puzzle, but they can (sadly) do that. Not mentioning it is just terrible.
Comment has been collapsed.
75 Comments - Last post 29 seconds ago by sensualshakti
22 Comments - Last post 3 minutes ago by sensualshakti
23 Comments - Last post 14 minutes ago by Realtione
763 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Sh4dowKill
14 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by Morak
307 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by Winny
46,892 Comments - Last post 3 hours ago by kbronct
31 Comments - Last post 1 second ago by Golwar
129 Comments - Last post 1 minute ago by Fluffster
69 Comments - Last post 1 minute ago by Patzl
2,425 Comments - Last post 2 minutes ago by Fluffster
37 Comments - Last post 3 minutes ago by BanjoBearLV
9 Comments - Last post 10 minutes ago by Aldcoran
98 Comments - Last post 14 minutes ago by Alucardeus
So I made this puzzle. I hope you like it =)
Rules are normal SG rules, no cheating, no sharing.
Edit: seems picture in Q2 is broken so here it is
Question 6 seems broke now and then for some so link
Comment has been collapsed.