Gift card giveaways?
On another note, there'll be giveaways here in a bit, based off the number of thread replies when I check back in. :3
In the meantime, some giveaways that are ending today can be found by way of a positive place on the forums.
Edit: 22 comments @ 1 gib per 5 comments = 4 giveaways.
Abyss: The Wraiths of Eden + Moebius: Empire Rising + Fermi's Path + Moribund
If anyone is interested in my Cat on a Diet, The Incredible Adventures of Van Helsing II, Broken Age, or Fault - Milestone One giveaways, and doesn't already have group access to them, leave a comment in the giveaways above and you might get an invite. ^.^
Comment has been collapsed.
That's an Admin giveaway and was expressly stated as a rare occasion, thus why this discussion exists in the first place. You walked in a circle.
Comment has been collapsed.
Huh, I got proven wrong before I got done sending my reply.
Comment has been collapsed.
The Admin in question created 3 giveaways for various gift card values and I assume is handling the verification himself, thus why it "does" exist.
Comment has been collapsed.
That never showed up as a giveaway for me? wth? I definitely would have entered if it did.
Comment has been collapsed.
They were supposed to be mailed to people subbed to Steamgift mails.
Pretty sure CG didn't intend for them to be shared like that...
Comment has been collapsed.
They should have showed since they're public no-requirement giveaways and they ran for like 2 weeks. You probably just didn't notice them. Anyway with each having 35k entries there was like no way to win that anyway.
Comment has been collapsed.
"You probably just didn't notice them"
That's just about impossible since I have over 10k games hidden and there is rarely more then a single page worth of giveaways shown as a result. But yea, chances of winning were incredibly low anyway.
Comment has been collapsed.
They should have, but apparently they didn't for some. I've got 14,213 games hidden, and right now I have only 11 public GAs visible, so no, you version is a bit improbable (to put it mildly).
Comment has been collapsed.
with each having 35k entries there was like no way to win that anyway
I mean, someone's gotta win it
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, I missed it too. I never saw it for some reason.
Comment has been collapsed.
I wondered the same. I got no better explanation to that ordeal. Oh well, back to gaming we go :D
Comment has been collapsed.
Wow...
I will use search for gift cards everyday from now ^^
Comment has been collapsed.
As much as I'd like to win them, anything with a direct monetary value is fairly difficult to handle on any site due to verification as you previously stated. I wouldn't hold my breath but I'd be interested to see an attempt.
Comment has been collapsed.
If they're treated as free games (ie, 0CV), verification isn't really necessary. While it does circumvent the "activate on your own account" component of the site- and honestly, I definitely don't want to take the site in a direction where that's in any way devalued- that's also something that the individuals inclined toward making such giveaways are already well aware of.
If GA creators make the giveaways with full awareness of what they are, and there's no harm done to the site as a whole, it feels a bit unnecessary to lock it out. Users already do all sorts of non-traditional freebies on the site: From giving away wallet codes to monthly bundles to outright mailing people physical items, we've already seen all sorts of things offered by users through the site. This just happens to be one of those things that we can actually streamline a bit, for those inclined to post them, with seemingly no ill effect for the effort.
Comment has been collapsed.
Worth. Individual responsibility is the only factor and I'm just a skeptic.
Comment has been collapsed.
My guess is that activation confirmation would still be an issue, even if a GA gives no CV the system still checks the winner's profile for activation.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's an interesting concept that I wouldn't oppose to, but I feel just giving people money directly wouldn't fit with what Steamgifts is supposed to be.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well SteamGifts went to being SteamBundleKeys pretty much, so one could argue it's already not what it was supposed to be :3
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't get comments like these. This looks like total criticism of the site. At the same time, you yourself only giveaway cheap bundle games (other than one that I saw from Humble Monthly). So, you give away bundled games while at the same time turning your nose up to others who do the same as you?
This is a giveaway site. Complaining about the giveaways is like complaining to grandma that she only got you $20 instead of $40 for your birthday. They gave you something for no apparent reason, why even complain about it?
Comment has been collapsed.
How is stating something like this a criticism? I don't understand your thought process, I assume you're one of those people who see criticism and offensiveness in everything?
My point was that SG nowadays isn't the way it originally was. It used to be more gifts oriented and nowadays it's mostly bundle keys and free games. I haven't said that's neither good nor bad, therefore again it was not a criticism of the site and I was not complaining about it.
While I still don't approve free game giveaways (albeit I'm not as opposed to it as I used to be) I'm not bothered at all by it being mostly bundle based nowadays. I'm actually pretty satisfied with the SG we have now, I think it evolved well and I wouldn't mind it changing further and allowing us to make steam gift cards giveaways. And that was actually the point I wanted to get across to Riedy; that the website already isn't how it's "supposed to be" and that there's no reason for it not to change further.
Comment has been collapsed.
I guess I see criticism in everything then...? Uhuh...
Right, so when you say "Steamgifts? More like SteamBundleKeys :3", then that's not meant sarcastically? And looking and what you're responding to, how could someone look at it and not see it as you stating it as a negative.
Look, okay, fair enough, you didn't mean it as negative, my bad.
Comment has been collapsed.
Right, so when you say "Steamgifts? More like SteamBundleKeys :3", then that's not meant sarcastically?
I wanted to say it more in a joking manner, no criticism intended. I guess I'm not good at expressing myself and after reading my sentence a couple more times I can kinda see why someone would misunderstand what I wanted to say.
Comment has been collapsed.
I think we're both at fault here. I've seen people use it sarcastically a fair bit, but I was wrong to immediately label the response. And maybe you can make it a bit more obvious for dummies like me :D
Comment has been collapsed.
One half of me agrees with you, while my another half would be happy that maybe, MAYBE people would buy something they would play. But as many other users, I rather give away keys from bundles, buying stuff on Steam is not really my main profile. (expensive with eastern european region + euro and they don't really deserve the extra spendings)
Comment has been collapsed.
Steamgifts is a platform that's designed to be utilized by a variety of different individuals with a variety of different intentions.
From access-restricted giveaways run by streamers to gaming websites to developers to bloggers to other specialized groups, to SGT filters, the site already engages in a level of customization that prevents it from adhering to any sort of singular, basic conception of the site.
Moreover, users already give away steam gift cards as is, when so inclined- they just lock it behind another giveaway (which an entrant may already have, may overlook, etc). Not putting them on the giveaway list doesn't prevent them from being posted, it just makes it more annoying for all involved, for seemingly no real reason (now that they can be reduced to give 0 CV) [other than catering to the subjective dislike some users have to the concept- which, as I detailed above, is itself something that truly doesn't fit with what Steamgifts is].
Comment has been collapsed.
Bump! Great idea. Since we cant gift other countries on steam this is an option.
Comment has been collapsed.
i wouldn't see them since i only look at giveaways for games on my wishlist, but i fully support letting people give them away here.
Comment has been collapsed.
Opposed due to inability to verify, opposed because I think giving straight up money is lame. The potential for abuse is fixable as long as such GAs basically don't count for anything, which leaves only my subjective distaste.
Comment has been collapsed.
How about full card sets instead single cards ?
Winner must make a badge.
Comment has been collapsed.
That couldn't be checked automatically, afaik, so the major benefit that would have isn't actually there; moreover, that wouldn't at all work as a substitute for giving someone wallet funds, and it misses the aim of this thread in wanting to streamline such processes, rather than make them more roundabout.
Comment has been collapsed.
In addition to what Sooth said, or rather to further explain problems with it - SG relies on SteamAPI, SteamAPI reports games you own, it does not report your inventory nor badges, which leads to several problems:
- People not making a badge and selling cards on the market, they cannot be automatically detected, they can make their profile private and never show anyone that they do not craft these badges, Support whilke they can check activations of private profile (they see logs of their syncs) would not be able to check activation (because no API support), so rulebreakers could never be caught.
- Even if someone has public profile you can never be sure if they actually crafted a badge, I could have badge on my profile already, then enter GA just so I get cards, sell them for profit and then pretend I crafted them into a badge I already have.
- Multiwins problem - theorethically you should be able to ewnter for same GAS multiple times, as there are multiple levels of badges.
- High possibility of fake GAs, as mentioned - no API for cards/badges, so a group of users could exploit the system - I already have 100 badges? Let my friends create 100 fake GAs for each badge I own and farm CV / ratio / reputation this way, again no way to prove fraud, because no API.
Comment has been collapsed.
I dunno, I liked the idea after seeing those gift card GAs, but it'd be a shame if they'd have to be 0 CV to counter the verification issue. Getting nothing for being pretty dang generous and all T_T
Also, what the hell, why is the obligatory potato option so good in the poll? How could I resist that???
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, people give such things out through the site already, without getting anything in return. This just streamlines the process for them. And given that the alternative is the gift cards not being able to be posted as giveaways at all.. it matches up to previously-free giveaways, with the concept that "being able to post them for no credit is better than not being able to post them at all".
I dunno, I peel that eye could have wedged a few more puntatos in there. ^.^
Comment has been collapsed.
Marry me, potato pun God.
Definitely agree, though, it'd be neat to have the option, and I don't think anybody would dislike winning one. Just for those saints who give them away...
Comment has been collapsed.
What surprised me most about these gibs was to see that there are only 35.000 active users on SG. I mean anybody likes a gift card to buy a game of your choice right?
Comment has been collapsed.
Not at those odds, not while you have other things to spend points on. It doesn't seem unreasonable to expect that a good portion of the site didn't enter, though it's less certain how that portion compares to the number of users that did enter.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm thinking it could cause issues with people who don't look/read getting angry about getting no CV from these giveaways. With bundled/free games, you can tell them "if it's free/bundled you get no CV" - It's simple. But adding such exceptions to the already overly complicated (for new users) system means you have to try explaining to them why something that is almost ALWAYS worth its full value isn't worth full CV.
In other words, too many exceptions in a system takes it away from being user-friendly, bringing new issues to the (already over-cluttered) figurative table.
Comment has been collapsed.
Honestly, that's easily solved by adding a "Please note: This giveaway will give 0 contribution value." prompt to the confirmation process of creating free-list giveaways. Add in a "This game will give reduced value." prompt, as well, and we should see less complaints overall.
That's less a premise for rejecting giftcards, and more a premise for once again lamenting how rare site updates are. :P
Comment has been collapsed.
But well, that's expecting actual general improvement to the website in general rather than the addition of one feature - I can think of many, many things that could be improved, but then that goes beyond the scope of this suggestion entirely. :P
Comment has been collapsed.
Eeych, point. Okay.. how about limiting the creation feature to people who know a specific url pointer, like https://www.steamgifts.com/giveaways/new?createtype=giftcard ?
Comment has been collapsed.
It could work... but it makes it a very "unofficial" feature, almost "exclusive (elite)" in a way (if there is no way to know about this other than being told by whoever knows). Seems like a strange idea in general, honestly. But I guess it's... a solution, albeit a very unconventional one. I'm thinking there has to be a better way to go about it one way or another.
Comment has been collapsed.
Most of SG's functioning isn't intuitive, from url commands, to SGT functionality, to scripts. It's really no different from anything we already have. And "elite" doesn't really match to something that's meant to give streamers and special groups more versatile giveaway options, since it's not affecting actual core site interactions in any way.
In fact, "elite" is defined as restricting something to an exclusive group- y'know, like how cg is the only one that can post such giveaways, right now? 🙄 Adding background features isn't really elite, it's just.. I mean, we don't think long-time Barter users are elite just 'cause they know more of the site's less-obvious functions, right? :P
And sure, we covered a better way just up above. But that'd require site management to change up their approach. :P
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, you could make a trade out of it by making an invite-only link but it's kinda pointless anyway
Comment has been collapsed.
Yep, as long as such giveaways bring no CV, they seem perfectly possible and harmless.
Another sort of GAs that could be included would be 'any game of your choice'
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm not sure but this could attract giveaway trolls. Those fake 3 x GTA 5 giveaways might become replaced with fake 3 x $50 card giveaways. It would be very frustrating to win one of them. With GTA 5 you at least have the consolation that the troll will be suspended and lose the slot, but there's no way to prove that you didn't receive those $50. And since it's easy to fake any screenshot but Support accepts screenshots as evidence, it's you who might find yourself suspended instead of the troll.
tl;dr: CV is not the only thing at stake. If you take CV out of the picture, you still need to have some verification to suspend users for fake giveaways or "Misuse of Giveaway Feedback".
Comment has been collapsed.
Seems like a fair argument. I don't see a problem in allowing them. It might help to have an another warning in addition to the double asterisk (**) as not everybody would be aware or read the small print (new users have been known to express surprise when they receive no cv for giving away a free game).
Comment has been collapsed.
I do not like this idea at all, because of one main problem - even if winner gotta redeem gift himself, and even if you get 0CV for it, there is still one thing left - anything won on SG should be used by you yourself, you shall not enter things to trade/resell them, or for any kind of personal profit. Yes, we have free games allowed now, yes you get 0CV for them, but winner still gotta activate them on their own account, they cannot sell them for profit, with gift cards it's different, I can activate a 50$ gift card I've won from you, but there is no way of checking if I did spend this money on getting myself a game or did I sold in on Ebay for example (I won 50$? let's put up auction where I offer 50$ Steam Gift for 45$, I am sure I will find a buyer and voila, 45$ profit). The moment we allow anything that can be used for personal real-life profit I believe the most important idea of SG goes down the shitter. Sure, right now someone may still win a game, not activate it and resell it, but it can be verified, it is breaking rules and such a person will be punished when caught. There is no way to verify what happened with wallet money you sent to someone, so people will be free to break rules about personal activation and go on unpunished.
Comment has been collapsed.
Not sure if someone else has answered accurately, but I'd assume they're not on the giveaway list since they can't be tracked like games can when redeemed. The rules of the site dictate users must redeem their wins on their account, and with gift cards, people could win them and sell them without anyone knowing.
That said, they should still be allowed I think, but giveaway creators need to be aware the winner may not be appreciative of the gift, and only do giveaways involving them to groups of people they trust wouldn't just resell them.
Comment has been collapsed.
This topic has been brought up previously, and dismissed due to the inability to verify activation (and thus openness to exploitation)- however, since then, the site has introduced free giveaways. By putting gift cards on the free giveaway list, there shouldn't be any further issue with their inclusion.. right?
I think a lot of us would appreciate the option to be able to do such universally appreciable giveaways, unless there's further reason why such giveaways would be a problem to allow for standard site users.
Comment has been collapsed.