...but I think we need to have some respect for the people submitting the games. Yes, random is random, but if I created a giveaway, and it was won by someone who won 6 games in the last week, and already owns the game, I would feel EXTREMELY shitty about it. In fact, I would probably never make another giveaway on this site again.

I think that the system needs to have some respect for its gifters, or else we are going to loose them. Don't bite the hand that feeds, you know?

1 decade ago*

Comment has been collapsed.

My personal suggestion when someone wins is this:

Remove all current entries on all other giveaways. Take away all their points. Their points will remain at 0 for X number of days (5 maybe). At the end of the 5 days, they get a set "start" amount of points, like 25 or 50.

1 decade ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

That is a horrible suggestion. The whole point of "points" is to make users more selective on which giveaways to enter. Yes, most people who entered these giveaways prior to the point system gained an unfair advantage, but give it time. I personally think the mods of the site are far more generous than they should be with how many points you gain whenever something new is added. Personally, I've won one game (Dark Messiah Might and Magic - Multiplayer only).

If your system were to be put into place, we would probably see around 10-20 entries for most of the giveaways and probably thousands for the "big ticket" items since people would only be willing to lose all of their points on these games.

1 decade ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I welcome discussion on the topic, but I don't think my suggestion merits being called "horrible".

As far as your second paragraph is concerned, I don't think that is true. The big ticket games cost more points, so people will be less likely to enter them when they could enter 6 small ones, to have a better chance of winning. Really I don't think my suggestion would change how people enter giveaways from how they do now.

1 decade ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

In my opinion it would lower submissions, because if you have a 5 day time where you can't do anything, that user would just NOT VISIT for those 5 days, instead he could be entering more, and submitting more giveaways.

1 decade ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

First off, I applaud you on at least attempting to make a suggestion instead of simply bashing it and walking away. I agree that it sucks to see someone win over and over, but in random scenarios that will happen. I would love to see a setup that made it so that you could not win the game if you already owned it, but taking away points after a win makes only a single thought scenario occur: I don't want to lose all my points by winning something that I merely wanted a little, so I will only enter the big games that I've been dying for.

This is effectively the scenario damnstraightnc suggested. That said, losing all the points for the entries to other contests of THE SAME GAME sounds justifiable. Now that I would not be opposed to. If you have entered every single contest for a single game, it is apparent that that game is important to you, and since the point cost is based on price, you have already stated that you are willing to invest for the possibility of losing these points. So, maybe just rolling back your idea a little, losing the points that you have effectively already spent for the same game in other contests. That sounds like an option to me.

1 decade ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

What if instead of starting with 25 or 50 points after the 5 days, they were just returned the points they had before they won (including those from entries that were removed)?

1 decade ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

That's a great thought, but it gives the same idea. That, if this was the case, I would want to win Frozen Synapse so much that I wouldn't enter Eets or any others because I would be worried that I would lose out on the chance to win the game I wanted most.

1 decade ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

"I would want to win Frozen Synapse so much that I wouldn't enter Eets"

Maybe that is a good thing though? It leaves Eets for those who really want it.

1 decade ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

So you are saying that someone wanting something more makes them more important than everybody else? Especially when they have done nothing extra to earn that importance other than a feeling internally?

1 decade ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I don't see how it makes them more important. You are entering the giveaways you want most, and they are entering the ones they want most.

1 decade ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Currently you need 50 points to generate an invite code to the site. Your plan would basically stop people who recently won from being able to invite their friends. You would also remove part of the incentive for them to turn around and submit a game since they would not get the 1-5 points doled out by their own submission. Why not just stop them from entering for 5 days WITHOUT screwing with their points.

1 decade ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Yeah I notice people keep focusing on the chances of winning and how that is rigged. The real focus should be on what the winner is doing with the prizes. The site is invite only, which means it's trying to keep winnings with a semi close knit group, and not everyone out there. When people start winning games they already own, that's where the problem arises.

When I went and made a post about someone abusing the system it seemed like half the people went in the wrong direction and thought the randomness of the site was flawed. facepalms

When my next giveaway ends, if someone wins and already owns the game...I guess I'll have to suck up the bad review, because there's no way I'm going to give it to them when others entered who might actually play the damn game.

1 decade ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

just for clarification: when i entered for games i already owned, i was only thinking about my girlfriend to sent the gifts to (i got a code for her now). i wasnt trying to enter every contest and give away or sell all my winnings to everyone i know (or dont know). but i do get your point and i hope that the invite code generator will bring more good than bad.

oh yeah and i won that second copy of portal while i was away so i couldnt exit the giveaway before i knew that i even won the first one. getting more than one was not my intention.

1 decade ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I understand entering a giveaway on behalf of your girlfriend, and I too have entered one on behalf of my wife. However, I only entered that one because the gifter specifically said he didn't mind entering for others.

The thing is, when you are the one giving away the game, and the person that wins turns out to already have the game, yes that the game will eventually get to someone who has not played it before. But the gifter will still feel robbed of the pleasure of giving the game to someone personally. Many of the gifters feel like they are loosing out on part of the experience that way.

1 decade ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

BlueLegion, I would actually love to hear what you think about this idea. If you won, for example Portal, all other portal giveaways you entered are removed and the points forfeited. Do you think this would be alright? At the rate people gain points, I certainly don't think it would be a problem, but I've only entered the few I've been really wanting lately and so my points are starting to stack up quickly, so maybe I'm not the right person to speak on this.

1 decade ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

So you give that copy away on this site again? :D

1 decade ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

SOLUTION:
Gifters, state beforehand the rules of your giveaway. (No one who already has the game, no one who has already won a giveaway, etc.)
State the rules such that you can claim that everyone knows the rules, and everyone knows everyone else knows the rules.

Problem solved.

1 decade ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Ok, I think I'm on board with this. If an official rule of the site was to read each description of any contest you enter than that would be great. I don't see a reason to restrict people who have already won, but I suppose I wouldn't mind that being up to the gifter.

I do think their needs to be a rule explicitly stating that you won't be banned for refusing to gift a game to a winner who already owns the game.

1 decade ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

While I agree, there is a problem. I don't think most people read the description before they enter each giveaway. This is evident by how many times I see people asking questions that were answered in the description. If the description was emphasized more, and the "enter giveaway" button was moved below the description, your suggestion could work.

1 decade ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

It would work better, but even without that change it would still work since, hey, it's up there for everyone to read. It'll the reader's own fault for not paying attention.

1 decade ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Right, I agree with you, I just think we would end up with half of all giveaways needing to be restarted because the winner didn't read the description.

1 decade ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Closed 1 decade ago by LieutenantClone.