I actually think it's too low. The "fear" of hitting the cap makes you use points so that they don't go "wasted" when you sit on the cap.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't really mind the 300 point cap, or the rate at which points are generated.
However, I'd like to see the option to enter multiple times for a giveaway. For example when there's a 50 point giveaway for a game you really want, you could spend 300 points on it and get 6 entries. That way people can spend more on the games they want the most, reducing the chance that people just spread their points around because there isn't enough they really want to play.
Comment has been collapsed.
I suggested in a previous thread that points be given out only based on public giveaways that the user doesn't enter, in order to further encourage people to only enter giveaways they actually gives a true damn about. Problem being that this would require a lot of studying the stats and playing with the math in order to balance right. Of course, what the balance should be is completely arbitrary, even in the current system. :/
Comment has been collapsed.
It depends on the situation. Sometimes I'm having a hard time getting rid of all my points, when other times there is an influx of very good giveaways and I don't have enough points to enter all of them, so I'll have to allocate my points more carefully. Since the point generation is 5% of the point value of every giveaway, it allows us to only enter 1/20 of the giveaways created. I think that is just enough. And besides, nobody is forcing you to spend all your points, you can just let them cap if you don't care.
Comment has been collapsed.
This. Like when there's a bundle that has one game I want and a lot of giveaways are made, 300 points isn't enough to enter all those giveaways. Most of the time I'm floating between 180 and 270 or so because the games I want aren't commonly given away unless a bundle pops up with one.
Comment has been collapsed.
As someone here said already - depends on day/period of time. Sometimes, when there are many giveaways of the game I really want, I want to join them all in order to have better chances of winning. Unfortunately I can't because of lack of the points. Also, if I know correctly, points rate has been decreased once, hasn't it?
Summing up - I would be really sad if the rate of points changed.
Comment has been collapsed.
Assuming point gain is cut to a tenth of its current amount:
1/1000+1/1000+1/1000+1/1000+1/1000+1/1000+1/1000+1/1000+1/1000+1/1000=10/1000=1/100
1/100 = 1/100
This does not improve any chances for you to win that game you really want.
Comment has been collapsed.
Dude, why you necrobump? You are the one reviving this conversation.
Comment has been collapsed.
11 Comments - Last post 3 minutes ago by adam1224
8 Comments - Last post 8 minutes ago by DarkDreams1
0 Comments - Created 16 minutes ago by MeguminShiro
29 Comments - Last post 23 minutes ago by DrR0Ck
282 Comments - Last post 55 minutes ago by osztihun
48 Comments - Last post 56 minutes ago by macgamer
120 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by ewoda
26 Comments - Last post 1 minute ago by moonlightdriver
21 Comments - Last post 4 minutes ago by jinjiin
278 Comments - Last post 41 minutes ago by kikuchiro
6,538 Comments - Last post 53 minutes ago by Oppenh4imer
10 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by OsManiaC
374 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by Rosayde
157 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by Kyog
I think i will make myself unpopular, but still i want to put this out:
The amount of Points we get to spend
http://politics.blogs.foxnews.com/sites/politics.blogs.foxnews.com/files/Jimmy%20McMillan.JPG
Is too damn high!
I think people should get less points so they really participate in Giveaways they want and not just to win anything.
I get myself sometimes thinking like....do i really need/want this giveaway or is it just to spend my points?
And often, after participating in Giveaways i want points are left...
So what do you think guys.
Sidenote: Please be true to yourself and give your opinion.
Comment has been collapsed.