Hi Devs/ Admins of SG

I'm relatively new here and have noticed something common in every GA created. Many of the entrants have won hundreds if not Thousands of giveaways! Which is fine of course, there is nothing wrong in winning thousands of games.
But if as a GA hoster, you want your games to go to someone who hasn't won much. You should have the choice to choose such an option.

IMHO the leveling system is imperfect in the context of gifting to those who might not afford buying many games or those who are just unlucky. As it doesn't take into consideration how much a User has won.They could have given 2000 games, but might have won just 10 games in 7 years. And vice versa, someone could have won 2000 games and given away only 10 games!

Also this feature should be totally Optional and inherent in the giveaway creation page. It can be met with a Yes/No prompt. Giving further qualifiers if Yes is selected. Hence only those Hosters who want to share games that way can go further with it.
I know this might be consider an imperfect suggestion, citing reasons to prevent auto joiners or farmers. But I feel it is something worth mulling and perfecting over with time.

An ability to choose a filtering system for the Giveaway Hoster will make the odds better for the Unlucky ones. After all, the act of Gifting/charity is sweeter and feels good to the giver if it goes to someone who doesn't have plentiful. :)

1 year ago*

Comment has been collapsed.

You might be interested in this perhaps:
https://www.steamgifts.com/discussion/orrR5/unlucky7-a-group-for-those-that-won-7-or-fewer-games-new-gifter-rule-23rd-feb-2020
Could ask Oppenh4imer for the 'gifter membership'.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

That's something better handled with SGTools. You can set many filters. Many SG users use it for invite-only giveaways.
http://sgtools.info

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I'm aware of that site. Just wanted something that is inbuilt in the giveaway creation page. I don't think most casual users will even bother to check out SGTools which is a shame really.
And if one is part of a ratio based group, SGTools isn't much of a help then.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

The Admin of sg nearly don't done work, that don't bring him something for his income, since years, so don't expect that something will be done.

You could set a few rules for the GAs with sgtools. Like the gifted/won rate, cv rate (gifted/won) and such stuff.
Bad thing is that it is then a private only GA and you need to share the link (+ cheaters will enter it with one of their account and give the direct sg link to their other accounts/"friends" that bypass the check -they don't get a [additional] punishment on sgtools because they are already perma blocked from the checks on sgtools and because sg don't work together with sgtools they don't get suspensions on sg) and invest more lifetime for setting the GAs up.

I would be happy to share a more joyful picture of the situation with you but i can only share the facts and realities that exist.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I like the idea. For the reasons that Masafor mentioned (one "good" account giving the direct link to aliases etc.), I think this is something that would be better implemented here than via sgtools or other external link. While, cheaters can be tagged via sgtools, that is just another burden unnecessarily placed upon the gifter.

Also, taking a giveaway private severely limits the number of people who would see/enter the contest, so adding this flexibility to public (all) giveaways would be helpful.

I'd personally be in favor of a few "hardened' options on the creation page as opposed to a secondary page activated by a "Yes" click.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Yes, just like how the Region restriction dialog box opens up after the Yes/No prompt.
That would be perfect for this. But then again, we're building castles in the sand here! Its highly unlikely the admin adds useful changes since there has been no prominent overhaul in the past many years.

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Valid point(s)!

1 year ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Closed 8 months ago by CultofPersonalitea.