Well, I think you’re wrong and often making ill thought out or misleading claims. So I’m going to address them.
But why, and to who? To Palooka, whose comments were the ones that triggered your comment? He should know from reading the thread and from being generally familiar with Valve that they’re going to give you at least 7 freebies and possibly 10 - and there have already been enough $2.50 or less sales to get your 10 objectives assuming those freebies. We’ve only had 3 of a possible 12 objectives that have cost more than $5.
Now you can say that’s not likely to hold up, but I’m very confident it is. Valve is very generous and inclusive when it comes to this sort of stuff - it’s extremely unlikely they’re going to put a halt to the free and $2.50 objectives. Most likely, I think they’ll work in enough free objectives that everyone will get an entry without buying anything.
No doubt the people who win the games (there are 3 100-game giveaways) will be people who got in for free, who own 9 games, who were bitching about Valve the entire time.
Anyway, there’s no reason to suspect that participation in this will require the purchase of an expensive game. You have not demonstrated a case to that effect.
It’s not meta. People get angry at other people for being angry at things all the time.
It’s funny and sad to me that in a world of nearly pure evil (video game publishing and sales), Valve stands as a lone beacon of awesomeness. They’ve always done right by their customers and have been extremely generous. And yet anytime they try to do the community a favor, I see about 10 times as much complaining about it as grattitude. OMG VALVE HAD THE AUDACITY TO GIVE AWAY GAMES IN NOT EXACTLY THE WAY I WANTED. OMG VALVE MADE A GAME SUPER CHEAP FOR PEOPLE BUT I ALREADY OWN IT. OMG HATE.
More people should be angry at the ungrateful community lest we be left with EA and activision and all those fucking bastions of pure evil fucking us in the ass.
Yeah, well you sound like Glenn Beck or a conspiracy theorist types. "Oh, I’m not saying I agree, but people have been saying [arguments], and they have a point because [supporting arguments], but oh I’m not saying I agree!
It’s a way to try to advocate an argument without living up to being accountable for it.