It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussionGOG Community Giveaway Tradition - Discussion and Poll(978 posts)(978 posts)
(978 posts)
Pages:
1
10
20
30
32
33
34
35
36
50
60
66
This is my favourite topic
Posted June 22, 2023
My view is that there are two defining traits of the Community Giveaway:
1) Only users who are known to be active on the GOG.com forum are eligible.
2) If you're eligible and a game is available when you post the request, you get it, no luck (other than happening to see the game before someone else gets it) or other conditions involved.
Changing any of that will make this no longer be the Community Giveaway but something else. No amount of arguments or explanations will change that.
Now, with the number of donated games falling, a very good question is whether the one game per month limit is still appropriate. May be useful to increase it unless there's a flood of donations.
Another would be whether the eligibility requirements shouldn't be stricter in general. Or at least for such costly titles. Though, again, that's harder to police.
Yet another would be whether those who'd donate expensive, highly desirable titles shouldn't be perhaps more encouraged to make their own giveaways I guess.
But changing the very foundation, no. Frankly, it's akin to GOG's "Good News" from 2014, dropping the second clear, specific principle. Had quite enough of that from suits, really don't want to see it from the community as well...
Posted June 22, 2023
avatar
Cavalary: there are two defining traits of the Community Giveaway:
1) Only users who are known to be active on the GOG.com forum are eligible.
2) If you're eligible and a game is available when you post the request, you get it, no luck (other than happening to see the game before someone else gets it) or other conditions involved.
Changing any of that will make this no longer be the Community Giveaway but something else.
Indeed, it is the very nature of GOG Community Giveaway.
Posted June 22, 2023
avatar
BenKii: Starred (★) Keys
Skyrim (drawing ends June 22, 2023 8am GMT)
Cyberpunk 2077 (drawing ends June 22, 2023 8am GMT)

Regular Keys
Deus Ex
Thief
System Shock 2
Prey
Dishonored
Interstate '76
Star Trek Elite Force
Quest for Glory 1-5

Daggered (†) Keys
A ton of amnesiac pigs :D
My view of this example is what I wrote earlier: the usual situation is likely to be that people are interested both in the big-name starred games and in some games on the regular list. However, by the time the draw would finish, all the regular games would most likely be gone. Thus those who enter the raffle and lose (which is the majority) will most likely not have anything left to choose from.

If one wishes to run random draws, I would prefer that they are run in parallel, instead of having to choose one or the other.
Posted June 22, 2023
avatar
DiffuseReflection: My view of this example is what I wrote earlier: the usual situation is likely to be that people are interested both in the big-name starred games and in some games on the regular list. However, by the time the draw would finish, all the regular games would most likely be gone. Thus those who enter the raffle and lose (which is the majority) will most likely not have anything left to choose from.
That's the whole point, bub. If you opt for entering the draw for the most expensive and popular title on the list (starred), then you may end up with nothing at all. Which isn't life-ending; nothing gained, nothing lost.
Post edited June 22, 2023 by Braggadar
Posted June 22, 2023
avatar
Braggadar: That's the whole point, bub. If you opt for entering the draw for the most expensive and popular title on the list (starred), then you may end up with nothing at all. Which isn't life-ending; nothing gained, nothing lost.
I understand that is how it would work, but if I am asked for my opinion, I do not prefer that for the community giveaway.
Posted June 22, 2023
avatar
Braggadar: If you opt for entering the draw for the most expensive and popular title on the list (starred), then you may end up with nothing at all.
Then you almost guaranteed will end up with nothing at all. Gambling will cause drastic inflation of starred entries on the list.

To make starred games really valuable, significantly increased request-cool-downs are the most appropriate solution.
avatar
GoldenCavalier: it's pretty obvious based on the giveaways he conducts himself - it's always a timed announcement where he gives plenty of opportunity to opt in to a random draw for the upper echelon games he's usually running them for. Tells me this is his idea of fariness
That's why we need alternative giveaway approaches in addition to those random-based events. To cover interests of numerous active community members, who are not into gambling.
Posted June 22, 2023
avatar
AlexTerranova: Then you almost guaranteed will end up with nothing at all. Gambling will cause drastic inflation of starred entries on the list.
Gambling indicates losing something to gain something better. Since you're not paying anything to enter this draw, it's not gambling. If you don't want to try your luck, then choose an non-starred game you'd like to play. If you win, congrats! If you don't, well better luck next time. Truthfully, I don't mind if I don't get something every month, so if I chose to grab for a starred game and I lost, and didn't find something I truly wanted at all, I'd shrug and move on in my life.

It will NOT cause a drastic inflation of starred entries. It merely allows for more people to have a chance at some of the higher sought-after titles than just the people who can afford to watch the GA like a hawk 24/7.
Post edited June 22, 2023 by Braggadar
Posted June 22, 2023
avatar
BenKii:
Sounds very much like TBBBOB - which was ousted in favour of this current community giveaway (though tbf that was partially favoured by people who no longer qualified / never would have qualified - and some are still entering on this one it seems, and partially because we had a break).

Take what you will from that but its food for thought. Good luck - I know how difficult it can be to try and be fair on this shit!

Edit: oh yeah, then there were some donators who expected to win the good prizes and not have the rules applied to them. :/
Post edited June 22, 2023 by Sachys
Posted June 22, 2023
avatar
Cavalary: My view is that there are two defining traits of the Community Giveaway:
1) Only users who are known to be active on the GOG.com forum are eligible.
2) If you're eligible and a game is available when you post the request, you get it, no luck (other than happening to see the game before someone else gets it) or other conditions involved.
Changing any of that will make this no longer be the Community Giveaway but something else. No amount of arguments or explanations will change that.
Now, with the number of donated games falling, a very good question is whether the one game per month limit is still appropriate. May be useful to increase it unless there's a flood of donations.
Another would be whether the eligibility requirements shouldn't be stricter in general. Or at least for such costly titles. Though, again, that's harder to police.
Yet another would be whether those who'd donate expensive, highly desirable titles shouldn't be perhaps more encouraged to make their own giveaways I guess.
But changing the very foundation, no. Frankly, it's akin to GOG's "Good News" from 2014, dropping the second clear, specific principle. Had quite enough of that from suits, really don't want to see it from the community as well...
I definitely respect your viewpoint. Let me ask a question though - what makes it a giveaway? How someone ends up with a free game? Or just the fact that someone ends up with a free game? It's plain different people are viewing this whole thing from different perspectives. For example the fellow who keeps equating this to gambling, even though in my mind none of us is actually risking/wagering anything. But it just reinforces my point. Benkii identified, via feedback I'm guessing, that there is an issue with fairness. Don't think I've seen anyone say anything convincing that disproves this. So trying to alter the giveaway in an attempt to make it more fair for more of the community seems like a logical and worthwhile experiment. No matter which way he goes, I'm sure some will be happy and others will not, it's the nature of all things.
Posted June 22, 2023
avatar
Braggadar: Truthfully, I don't mind if I don't get something every month, so if I chose to grab for a starred game and I lost, and didn't find something I truly wanted at all, I'd shrug and move on in my life.
That is the actual problem. People will enter draws, just for the game is starred ( marked "special" ), not because they want to play it ( ever ). But if the very same game was not starred, they would likely ignore the title.

In case of long cool-downs, users will knowingly sacrifice their opportunities to ask for more games during several upcoming months. In order to get one game, which they really desire to play.
avatar
GoldenCavalier: I'm guessing, that there is an issue with fairness. Don't think I've seen anyone say anything convincing that disproves this. So trying to alter the giveaway in an attempt to make it more fair
It's a misconception. Random makes things uncertain, not "fair".
Posted June 22, 2023
high rated
avatar
AlexTerranova: It's a misconception. Random makes things uncertain, not "fair".
Let's take a concrete much simplified example.

Let's assume 10 participants, 9 of them (A-I) are retired and spend their days checking GOG every hour of the day. The 10th (J) works three jobs to make ends meet and has time to visit GOG only once a week, during which he catches up on new games and posts enthusiastically.

Let's assume for simplicity there is only one game offered each month.

Under the non-random system, obviously J has practically zero chance of getting that game, since as soon as it is released, one of A-I asks for it and gets it. He receives zero games for all eternity, unless you introduce a 10-month-or-longer cooldown period (even a 9-month cooldown will do nothing for him).

Under a random system in which a drawing is done once a month (since there is just one game), J has at least a 10% chance of winning, so he might get a game once a year.

Don't you think the latter is not only more uncertain, but also more fair?
Posted June 22, 2023
avatar
AlexTerranova: That is the actual problem. People will enter draws, just for the game is starred ( marked "special" ), not because they want to play it ( ever ). But if the very same game was not starred, they would likely ignore the title.
You quoted me saying I don't mind when I don't get anything to support a different argument. I don't enter draws for something just because they're "marked". I enter draws because I do want to play it. And I DO play them. As do many others who request a game.

I don't subscribe to the assertion that people will enter a draw for games just because they have a special marker next to them. Most people who request already know what the titles are at least to a small degree. Others look it up in the store if they're unsure. You make it sound like a Black Friday sale where everyone just grabs stuff on the shelf because it says "on sale".
Post edited June 22, 2023 by Braggadar
Posted June 22, 2023
avatar
mrkgnao:
You set it really excellently and humanely. I hadn't thought it that way. +1. In this sense, I agree with the draw.

Another thing I would like to say is that at first BenKii seemed to me that he would be more strict than Lone_Scout was, and some of the people who asked for games in the latter's giveaway, would be ruled out in the former's (I do believe that myself included to those ruled out too...), but he seems, to me at least, that he is more lenient than Lone_Scout and he accepts people more easily. As another person stated, one way to avoid the draw is for the starred games to be given only to the most eligible members (admittedly not me among them), who help the community in multiple ways, especially with their useful advice and solutions to problems.

Another thing to maybe be reexamined is whether the Community Giveaway must necessarily be monthly. Lone_Scout had "Monthly" in the title, but not BenKii, and maybe it shouldn't be monthly. As someone again stated, since the people getting a game have increased and the offered games decreased, maybe it should be made that one could ask for a game every 2 months (and including the stricter requirements of eligibility I mention above).
Posted June 22, 2023
avatar
Cavalary: My view is that there are two defining traits of the Community Giveaway:
1) Only users who are known to be active on the GOG.com forum are eligible.
2) If you're eligible and a game is available when you post the request, you get it, no luck (other than happening to see the game before someone else gets it) or other conditions involved.
In my opinion, a much suitable defining factor of this giveaway apart from the first:
"1) Only users who are known to be active on the GOG.com forum are eligible."

is…
2.) It is a community-driven giveaway. Fostered by the collective gifts of the generous members/donors of this place.
 
avatar
Cavalary: 2) If you're eligible and a game is available when you post the request, you get it, no luck (other than happening to see the game before someone else gets it) or other conditions involved.
This sounds more of a ruling, not the essence.
While the the same could also be said with the eligibility requirement, we all know it's there to reward and promote active forum participation. Which makes it vital part of the community giveaway, unlike the quoted #2.
 
avatar
Cavalary: […]
Changing any of that will make this no longer be the Community Giveaway but something else. No amount of arguments or explanations will change that.
My argument is the above, so I beg to differ.

―――――――――― ―――――――――― ――――――――――
I wish to cast my vote in support of the proposed amendment.
The way the traditional rule operates, puts those located afar from the host at a constant disadvantage.

That said, I wouldn't complain should we keep it as it is.
Because at the end of the day, some goglodytes gets to enjoy their new game, and the generosity of this community is once again highlighted.
Isn't that the whole point? no?
Posted June 22, 2023
avatar
mrkgnao: Don't you think the latter is not only more uncertain, but also more fair?
If the game is on the list, is not requested yet, and you are eligible, you certainly get the game. It is both certain and fair at the same time.

The example, you've written is arbitrary. We would have to collect real statistics and professionally analyze that data to make any meaningful conclusions.
avatar
Braggadar: You make it sound like a Black Friday sale where everyone just grabs stuff on the shelf because it says "on sale".
Yes, I think it will cause similar effect. You might not behave that way, but many others will.
avatar
mrkgnao:
avatar
CarChris: You set it really excellently and humanely. I hadn't thought it that way. +1. In this sense, I agree with the draw.
Because it is completely unrealistic. Not even theoretically possible.
Pages:
1
10
20
30
32
33
34
35
36
50
60
66
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussionGOG Community Giveaway Tradition - Discussion and Poll(978 posts)(978 posts)
(978 posts)