I apologize in advance if this has been suggested before, I couldn't find anything via search.

This idea should give everyone a better chance to win the gifts they really want.

Instead of having to spread our points across multiple gifts, let us enter a gift more than once. The hope is that this should let a user prioritise their points over gifts they want WHILE not entering other gifts simply because they have unused points. You will also not have to share the chance with others who aren't that interested in the gift (because they'll be concentrating their points on the gifts they want). You are spending points on a better chance to win while giving up some chance to win some other gift.

I'm not sure on what the best way to calculate the point cost would be. I would just deduct the same cost per entry, perhaps also a cost for entering more than once. Example: entering a 50P game 3 times = (50P*3) + 10P extra = 160P. Then again, I am not entirely sure about the extra cost bit, it might hurt a user's chances of winning anything in the long run as they'll lose points faster. Maybe someone who's good in statistics/math can play with the numbers?

-Steve

13 years ago*

Comment has been collapsed.

If I recall correctly, CG, Loko, and most if not all, the site mods have said that this idea will never ever ever ever happen. They've said it multiple times. Somehow every 2 weeks there's a new thread about it for the last year.

I can understand why no one remembers it because it was months ago, and most of these threads get started by new people who sparingly participate in the forums so they never read those posts. I wish it would get stickied or put in the FAQ

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

That's a good idea. If a topic tends to come up a lot, but has already been addressed, putting it in the FAQ would be helpful. People could just point there to explain the situation.

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

yeah, we should make a thread about this :3

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Agree.

And you know what? This is SteamGifts - this thread will be hated, trolled by users (as every idea to correct sth) and finally CLOSED by moderators with nothing changing. Usual day on SG.

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Yea and you know what? Its a terrible idea. If you want that system go to playblink.

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

It's only your opinion. I think it's a great idea. Give us 3-5 chances to enter giveaways and we will really show, which games matter for us.

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

but the main idea is that you just enter games that you want, why are you going to enter a give-away for a game that you dont want? (yeah, i know, people actually DO that, but That is wrong)

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

So sad, but so true. We have opinions, we can say them. I totally agree with your agreement.

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

A bit bold statement. Not to diminish your experience in things, but stating that nothing ever changes here week after registration seems exaggerated. Most of these ideas are discussed multiple times in history, so people tend to get a bit fed up with them. Even if they seem new and sparkly for the new members, there might not be that much shine left for the older members.

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Woah, why always people with 0 gifts made and low contributions always have ideas?:D

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Because that describes 90+% of the userbase of this website.

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

+2

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

OBJEC--, jk I just like your avatar.

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Please stop saying some things like this like the other users. You have no idea why these people are here. They could be trying to win a game for a gift for their friend, or maybe they're in a bad economical situation and can't afford games of any kind. Or maybe they're just casual gamers that could really use some new material. Or, like a lot of people, they could just be extremely greedy and want many games to brag about to other people. A lot of people who have no giveaways made are incapable of buying a game they can give away, or they're just plain greedy. So please, stop saying stuff like this.

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Sorry, but no way someone who really can't afford games would ONLY click enter giveaways and don't give a shit about the community itself

Most of the people around the internet don't care about others, they shield themselves with that cool cloak of anonimacy and just try to make profit of others. When I see people making suggestions like this and I see gazillion enters, 0 gifts done, 0 or really low comments done, I can't do anything else than think what I said.

"They could be trying to win a game for a gift for their friend, or maybe they're in a bad economical situation and can't afford games of any kind."<- This is forbidden in this site, if you win something is FOR YOU. Also what's the F**** point of gifting something to a friend when you haven't even get it by yourself in the first place?

It's not that hard buying some of those bundles for 0.5euro you know

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Your first 2 sentences contradict each other. Someone on the internet who doesn't care about others and tries to make a profit off of others is going to ONLY enter giveaways and not interact with anyone else in any way in the community. BUT, on your last sentence, I agree. I personally bought Humble Indie Bundle #5 the other day because that is a great deal and it is much better then going out and buying 8 games separately. Also, 3rd paragraph, wtf?

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

you cant give or trade games that you won here, is one of the rules, and is a good rule, the idea is that you win games that you want to play, and if a friend want that game, he can get in in that give-away him/her self...that is for the first sentence

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

"They could be trying to win a game for a gift for their friend"

Then I hope they enjoy their bans.

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

This lol.

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

the same reason because lately, some contributors are acting like dickheads...

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Maybe they recently joined? It is irrelevant how many giveaways the person has made. Maybe they're poor and can't afford games at this time. If they're treated well here, once they do have extra money, they may create giveaways to show their appreciation in another way. It doesn't mean their ideas are not any good.

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

+As many points as I'm allowed to give someone. THANK YOU!

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

this would mean people would save up for 300 points and this makes it un-fair, if you really want it you would buy it whether from steam or as a steam key from a 3rd party site or just not on steam.

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

We can have limited number of entries (max. 3-5).

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Can you explain how it makes it unfair? Everyone gains points at the same rate. Everyone can save up 300 points. Everyone has equal means, isn't that like the definition of fair?

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

This has already been discussed before. No one wants this feature because one could stay away from the site for weeks/months and then suddenly enter a giveaway a gazillion times.

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Point cap is 300, so no one could enter a giveaway more than 300 times. Of course, that would be for a one point game, and there isn't many out there.

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Which is different in fairness exactly how? People can still do that exact thing right now, except they would spread it across many different games, whether they truly want to play those games or not.

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

it maybe can work for massive public give-aways, in a way... but still this will fuck the whole system... the idea of this site is balance, the giveawayas are balanced, you have 1, and only one chance to win, if this is implemented the balance will go to hell, and as a side problem, people will bitch A LOT MORE...

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Agree with this suggestion

Maybe add an option to the giveaway creator, so he/she can choose this method or the old one

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

+1 This is a good idea.

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I approve of this suggestion on the grounds that it:

1) Maintains the fairness of the giveaways. Everyone gains points at the same rate still, so everyone has the same means to enter the same number of times as everyone else on any one particular giveaway.

2) Encourages people who will play the game to enter: With the current system if you hit the points cap, in order to not let your points go to waste people feel encouraged to waste their points on giveaways they may not even care about. With this entering multiple times system people are able to enter only for the games they truly want, thus reducing the number of games that are given away and then never played.

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

+tons of points Thank you so much!!!

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Second point is valid and in my opinion only one mentioned in these threads that supports this cause. Though it is not really the system's fault if people are greedy and enter in giveaways they have no desire to win.

Few notices in general concerning it. At the moment, there is already possibility to do this by entering multiple giveaways. For example if one really wants Magicka, member can enter in all available Magicka giveaways and thus increase possibility of winning by using more points into it.

Counter example for this would be valid if the game at hand is rare e.g. Skyrim and has only one giveaway alive at any time. Highly popular games would likely gather lots of attention. Thus many members would use all of their points into it at the cost of other giveaways. This would likely balance out so one would not get higher chance by using multiple entries as everyone else would be doing it too.

Only case I can think for now where case mentioned earlier would actually work as wanted is when the game is rare and unpopular. Unpopular game would mean higher chance of winning anyway making the point a bit moot.

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

o look...another playblink feature. NO thanks :D

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Exactly what I thought. On another note: why are these "features" always requested by ppl with a comment/entry ration <1?

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

+1

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

1) That's irrelevant to the validity of the suggestions

2) It's only because the majority of users are those types of people

If it makes you feel any better I could be the one that starts this thread every month. Then the thread will meet your comment ratio requirements for legitimacy

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Moyako approves.

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Bad idea.

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

It could be done methinks.

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I think this is a good idea, but it would break private giveaways which would otherwise have only a handful of total entries.
Maybe do it only for public ones?

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Make an option to allow/disallow multiple entries.

Also, it should cost a lot more for each consequent entry (double each time ?).

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

How does it break them exactly? The handful of total entry people can each enter as many times as they want if they feel so inclined to do so. They all still have an equal chance at winning if they so choose.

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

In the end it would be the same thing, everybody would also enter multiple times in the popular games. Instead of one chance out of 2500 entries (for example), you would have four chances out of 10000 entries.

Also it sounds exploitable.

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

How is it exploitable?

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

It would'nt be the same thing. Many points would have gone to the popular games - less points would have been spent for "don't know what to do with my points left after entering this popular game - whatever nearly random clicks to join"

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

So imagine ironclads collection (1P), someone made a giveaway for that and u would have 300 points to put in that giveaway. Which ends up being 300 entries, now imagine this multiplied by the amount of people that would also want the same gift, in the end it's the samething, you just end up wasting more points in the same giveaway.

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

But only people who really want that game would be willing to put 300p towards it. Also, there could be an entry limit, like say, 10 or 20 entries per person, max.

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

We should have a sticky with links to searches on this forums of all these repeat ideas

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

No. Just... no.

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

I can see a lot of people wasting all 300 points on one gift.

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

This would be nice. When i first came to this site i though that you could enter more than once.

13 years ago
Permalink

Comment has been collapsed.

Closed 13 years ago by SuaveSteve.