Point Distribution

I don't like this idea. I already run out of points entering games that I look very interesting to me. I don't want less points.

I personally don't support this change for one simple reason - flash giveaways. On occasion something I'm very interested in comes on sale/is bundled, and then a ton of people who don't want it make giveaways for it immediately. Those giveaways usually last less than a day and I've found myself quickly running out of the 300 points simply by entering those. In those times point regeneration has come really handy since there's no way to know when a good deal comes along so you could "bank your points" beforehand. I must note that outside of those times I usually have full points and rarely drop even below 200.

In my opinion the point system should stay untouched, but stricter punishment for using scripts would be very welcome.

I definitely think we need to reduce the points, but I like the way the system is currently setup where you get a percent based on the value of the giveaways created. I feel that if we are given a flat amount of points there will be times when you don't have anywhere near enough points and times where you have way too many. Having points given based on the value of the giveaways created allows you to enter a certain percent of the giveaways no matter how many giveaways are created.

An example would be how there are a ton of giveaways created when the Humble monthly is released and with this system you will quickly run out of points because you are receiving the same number of points, but there are so many more giveaways being created, especially the huge influx of 1 hour giveaways right after bundles are announced. Then there will be times when there are not many giveaways, but you are receiving the same number of points with not much to spend them on.

The points are going to become so restricted right when the Humble monthly or another popular bundle is released, which will make entering giveaways much more strategic. People will have to sit on the site and watch giveaways until they are almost over and see how many people enter to try and get the best chances of winning because they know the points gained are very few compared to the number of giveaways created at this time and if they wait until most of the people run out of points entering the early giveaways right after the bundle is released, they will have much better odds entering the later giveaways when everyone is out of points.

Also, a lot of people already store points in giveaways that don't end for a long time so they can take them out and use them in these type of situations. Reducing the points that much and having them given at a flat rate instead of a percentage will make storing points much more valuable and more important to improve your chances of winning when these type of bundles are released.

I feel like giving points based on a percent of the value of the giveaways created fixes this problem because as a large number of giveaways are created, you will receive a larger number of points to enter them and as less giveaways are created, you will receive less points and not be flooded with points you don't know what to do with.

If we currently receive 5% of the value of giveaways created in points, I think it would be good to drop the point generation to somewhere between 2 and 3%. This will cause people to think about what they are entering and enter for games they actually want to play instead of entering everything for the +1 on their Steam account. Also, to reduce the advantage of using bots and give a more fair chance to the people that cannot sit on the site all day, the points cap should be increased. I don't know how high to make the cap, maybe around 500?

I see this as an issue, because users should not need to invest this much time into entering giveaways. People should also not need to wake up in the middle of the night to avoid hitting the point cap.

IMHO, People should enter giveaways for games they actually want, not just for the +1. I don't remember having to way for the points to refill in a long time, but if it helps the community as a whole, then go for it.

The system is perfect as it is. I don't care if I hit my cap because I mostly only enter in wishlist ones and some recommended onest. Lowering the cap means when there's a mass bundle I won't be able to enter as many such as when Burning Blood was on here about 3 weeks ago.

Tearing down on a specific set of users who cheat by applying a rule to everyone is counter-productive.

I might be in the minority here, but I only enter games I would want to play, so I rarely ever use all my points. I'm fine with sitting at 300 points, I don't feel compelled to spend them simply for spending sake.

On that note, your idea probably won't affect me much at all, but I hope my limited input might help anyway!

I'm with those that suggest increasing the minimum duration of giveaways if you change the point system. One hour is too short and IMO contributes way more to bot use and spending a lot of time online entering giveaways.

OK, got a couple burgers in me, so I'll begin by addressing things you've said. Forgive me for being blunt - this is unfiltered Tzaar.

and visit the site 6x as often just to use all of their points.
.
because users should not need to invest this much time into entering giveaways.
.
but need to invest less time into joining giveaways.

With all due respect, that comes off as though you're trivializing the efforts (and monetary input) of the giveaway creators of the site. I've already seen you condone the use of "one touch" giveaway entering in your other thread, which I already find disrespectful to giveaway creators and the descriptions they add in their giveaways. But that's another animal altogether. it does merit a brief mention here, however.

To put it bluntly - giveaway creators are the backbone and lifeblood of your site - and should be treated as such. Without them, you have 1 million people sitting around with their thumbs in their asses, wondering why they're even here. Your giveaway creators, not your giveaway entrants, should always be the primary concern. Anything that disrespects their time and efforts is an immediate "no freaking way" in my book.

Next up -- as a site admin, shouldn't you want people visiting your site multiple times per day? Those people are your community, and that behavior should not only be encouraged, but also rewarded, even if in only some small way. Your proposed changes appear to be aimed at making equal the once-daily visitors and your multiple-times-daily visitors. In my opinion, they're not equal, and if multiple visits provide bonus opportunities to enter giveaways, then that should be encouraged -- let's remember, those repeat visitors are quite probably the most active and most vocal members of the SG community as well.

Yes, I know - but what about the bots? No one likes bots (except the bots themselves) - but discouraging people from visiting your site more often is going to have an adverse affect on the community and quite possibly in the number of giveaways made. Once again, those giveaway creators are the backbone around here. They're the reason people visit your site. I would in fact be curious of numbers that would prove/disprove any correlation between repeat visitors and who makes the majority of giveaways (per person). You've already said that you're working on other means of dealing with bots. Point generation should have little or not effect, if what you've said is true.

OK, so the real issue is "too many points being generated per person" - but at the same time we don't want to actively discourage (or even accidentally discourage, for that matter) giveaway creation - it is, after all, the reason the site exists. We also don't want to turn your "best customers" aka repeat visitors into once-a-day visitors.

Any of these can be used in any combination:

1. Drop that % per giveaway created way the hell down. If it's 5%, make it 2%, or even 1% - whatever puts it within a reasonable level, one where people are still going to look forward to coming to your site to enter giveaways, but not so high that people are able to buy kilos of coke from Colombia with their excess points.

2. Eliminate points for any of the "free games." The site is being deluged with "free games" lately, and it's becoming more frequent, as more and more sites are giving away free games more often. There's no reason for those free games to flood points into the current system. I don't believe you'll see any change in the number of those giveaways created by eliminating point generation for them.

3. Drop the generation of points by "bundled" games to reflect the CV amount paid out for those games, rather than the retail price of the games. If a $10 bundled game is being given away, points generated should be based on 15% of that price, or $1.50. That would solve a lot of the current points issues right there.

4. This one, to me at least, is important for keeping the community intact by encouraging repeat visits -- keep the point generation system dynamic. Those repeat visitors create giveaways, interact in the community more, and are an important aspect of the site. Don't trivialize them into non-existence, please.

5. If you do in fact want to "help" the people who visit the site less frequently, then raise the cap on points to a level to reflect that. You can lower point generation and still cater a bit to the once-daily visitors without turning your repeat visitors into once-daily visitors.

6. And yes - KILL THOSE F'KING BOTS ALREADY. And I mean all of them. Every last one. No one should be "allowed" to run a bot on the site for any reason - unless it's you personally - no exceptions. I don't care what they're used for -- it's all or nothing. You can't make exceptions and expect people to take you seriously when you say you want to eliminate bots on the site.

Sorry for the wall of text and for presenting my thoughts in such an unfiltered manner. I've had all day to consider these topics, and as a very active member of this community, they're topics that are important to me. If you do happen to read - then thank you.

limit daily points will not keep up with the demand

Try to divide by 2 or 3 the current points given to visitors

In this way the points will accompany the demand of the creation of the GAs and there will be no missing suffering

what about to remove points and to let people enter daily few giveaways?

Well I only enter giveaways on my wishlist until all of them are entered. Then I proceed using my extra points on groups or recommended giveaways. Placing a very small cap could mean I won't be able to enter all wishlist giveaway thus making recommended and group giveaway useless. Well at least for me they will be useless.

I agree. My points rarely go below 200 points.

A fixed amount seems like a good idea but 14,400 per month seems a bit low. Going from 45,000 straight down to 14,400 is a huge drop. The amount of giveaways are already showing a trend of increasing over time. If the fixed amount is as low as 14,400 then there will be an ever increasing trend of giveaways with less and less entries, perhaps even none eventually. Maybe a slightly higher amount of points like 28800 per month or just 23040 points per month.

I tend to agree with Tzaar's post, and I'd like to add that point generation shouldn't be unrelated to the number and value of giveaways being created.
Having a fixed rate of point generation definitely helps having a more casual relationship to Steamgifts, where once would log on once or twice a day and call it quits.
The point cap is there to promote site visits in the first place.
As far as bots go and their correlation to points, one could lessen the incentive for using one, without adhering to fixed points (see Tzarr's post).

You might not need to change anything if bundled games just gave 15% of the 5% or 0.75% (if its 5% back) and free games give nothing to point generation. It leaves the system dynamic to the number of giveaways. Severely cuts into the CV explosion from dollar or software bundles. Even if there is a short period where a few not previously bundled games give full point generation (waiting to be marked as bundled), it should still help the overall CV situation a lot. It even provides a little enlightened group incentive to gift unbundled games.

The second part of the equation is the need to check the site. As long as new giveaways start and finish within an hour, there will be an incentive to check in every hour for some. The only way to make it less would be raise the minimum giveaway time. While capped CV might be another incentive, any steps which reduce point generation will help..

disgusting news. had to do a poll on the main page and let the community decided. huge mistake, I am very upset by these innovations.

i like the way it is now

I think this will affect how we use points. Some are just looking first pages and pick on and some do a research and pick what they think they want.
With that system, good giveaways will be more picked (ex : only 12 pillard of ethernity per day ) and this will reduce chances on them and the baddest giveaways will have less entries. So users will less thinks: "what's that? Oh I try " and they will chase for only some.
And this will affect rush times (humble time) if point are regular. You only have to wait for the overs use them points so you will pass the same or more time to watch it.
To reduce that you will have to increase the time minimum of a giveaway to half a day minimum. This will permit a distribution of entries on different giveways.
So I don't think it's a good idea to reduce at this point.
A better idea is to reduce slighly the distribution of point with a multiplicate from today using. Divide from 1.5 to 2 is fair I think.

Bad idea...Its better how it is now....

I don't mind slower generation, but I would like the cap increased then. For my average day I use maybe 100-200 points only (at this moment I have only 33 non hidden GAs), so slower generation is ok. On the other hand after some bundles releases (e.g. Humble Monthly) there is often a flood of 10-20P quality games I would like to get. Since those are often rather popular games the "everyone has less points" is unlikely to help.

TBH, I feel like by the time a thread like this happens, the decision has already been made anyway. But I'll suspend my disbelief for a moment.

I concur with Lugum. By restricting points, restricting what people can enter, and (by cg's own reasoning) decreasing the number of entries in GAs, all this will do in the long run is further incentivize the use of alternate accounts and bots. It will not improve things for the average user, it will make the situation worse.

Anyone noticed that those who seem to be mostly against the reduction are the ones who won game played stats are similar to this:

View attached image.

I like this change forcing people to be more selective about the games they enter for. I might even start making giveaways again.

As someone with way, way too much time on his hands and a compulsion to spend a lot of it using his points up on SG, I actually feel oddly relieved that something is being done. I don't want to stop visiting here, but I could use a break!

Whether or not this is the solution we need to solve the whole situation, well... we'll just have to try it and see. I hope that the restrictions on joining SG will curb any potential for people trying to use alternate accounts and that doesn't become the next big problem.

Also, I have to say that I really like the idea of increasing the minimum giveaway length. Something like 3-5 hours would be ideal, in my opinion.