It's because those with mutliple accounts would then have even more chance to spam the hell out of the giveaways they want. That's it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Actually not, and a forum search only shows a few over the last 10 months (rare for a forum this size). And every time it has been suggested, the answers are either "No" with no justification, or a well written reason why it is an okay idea.
Not that our voices matter much, but among those willing to provide a coherent justification for their position, there is an overwhelming support in favor of the idea.
Comment has been collapsed.
I say yes! allow only up to one less multiple entries to multi count-users!
Comment has been collapsed.
I forgot to mention it in the post but I did look it up and read the comments but couldn't find any reasons why it wouldn't be good to do it. Also, the discussions I could find were about 10 month old, and I think things have changed a bit since then.
Comment has been collapsed.
I've only been here 5 month, but I'm positive I have seen this particular suggestion multiple times.
EDIT: That said, after a casual search, I haven't been able to find any more recent threads either.
Seems I have to apologize for the 'How-about-people-look-up-previous-discussions-first knee-jerk reaction of mine. Sorry about that :/
Comment has been collapsed.
No problem. I think you may be right that this has been discussed before, judging by all the short "no" replies and the "not this again" ones, but like you said, for some reason, they don't appear in the search results. That's why I was hoping to get a real discussion going in this thread and maybe settle the issue =)
Comment has been collapsed.
Im sure, like you, that this has come up many(read 3 or 4) times in the time I've been forum lurking.
Comment has been collapsed.
Do explain how this makes the chances unequal? Both can make multiple entries. And if someone blows all his points on one game, he can't participate in an other (or others) for some time, raising your chances. The overall net effect is 0.
What matters is altering your chances to win one particular giveaway.
RL lotteries allow multiple tickets, no reason for it not be the same here.
Comment has been collapsed.
RL lottery tickets are bought with RL money, which have actual value as opposed to the points system.
Everybody who participate should have an equal chance. Nobody should be "more entitled" to win a giveaway because he "REALLY REALLY WANTS IT". Everyone who enters really really want it as they wouldn't be entering otherwise.
Comment has been collapsed.
Nobody would be more entitled since we all get the same amount of points and are free to spend them as we want. And I'm sure you can agree that everyone want certain games more than others, but since you can only enter once and then have points to spare, you probably will see a random game and think "hmm.. this doesn't look that bad" and enter even though you might not play it afterwards, lowering the chances of people who actually want that particular game.
Comment has been collapsed.
you don't have to enter random giveaways (in fact, please don't, because i might want one of those!) entering a giveaway for a game you're not actually interested in playing is just as much a waste as letting your points get to 300. also if you have 300 points and suddenly a game you really want goes on sale you're more ready to enter the flood of giveaways that come from people buying the sale just to give it away.
Comment has been collapsed.
I haven't dropped below 200 points ever since I started actively participating (like ~2 months I guess. Disregard the 9 months account age. I had forgotten about this place).
It's a waste to not enter random giveaways, because I'm actively losing points.
From my experience, the games I 'want' never show up in large enough amounts for your point to be valid (the cheaper ones I would buy myself anyway, and you don't see 100x, say, Skyrim, popping up).
Comment has been collapsed.
Actually its less of a waste, Atleast you get a game lol
Usually I only enter Half Life giveaways, But I always have >230 points so I decided to broaden a lil bit. Now I also enter Dota 2 & Dungeon Defenders. With the occasional "This looks interesting" game.
I wouldent do it normally but since I have the points & The game seems kinda fun, Might aswell give it a try :P
Comment has been collapsed.
it's different if you're entering for a game you're sort of interested in versus just any game so you don't "waste" points. i'm saying the points are just as wasted if you use them for a chance to win a game you wouldn't play. that's because i don't put any value in having a game on my account that i'm not going to play, but i recognize some people just like to have every number as big as possible.
Comment has been collapsed.
you don't have to enter random giveaways (in fact, please don't, because i might want one of those!)
Well that's the problem, since people see the points just sitting there and figure they might as well enter for a game that doesn't look too bad, even though they might never play it and therefore decrease the chances of people that actually want the game and would enjoy winning and playing it.
Comment has been collapsed.
true, but i'm not sure that allowing people to enter more than once is making things better overall. it seems to help decrease people winning games they could care less about owning, but make it more difficult for people who are interested in enough games being given away that they don't have extra points to win because other people are entering more than once. it would help if you doubled the point cost for each additional entry, like if it's 10 points for the game it'd be 20 more points to add second entry, 40 more for a third, etc. that also effectively builds in a limit so people couldn't put 300 entries on a 1-point giveaway (8 entries would cost 255 points, with the 9th entry costing 256 points).
Comment has been collapsed.
Well that's why I suggested a limit of for instance 3. Maybe to start with, we could try a limit of only two entries.
Comment has been collapsed.
It is a good idea. Nothing changes between entering 10 separate Nuclear Dawn giveaways and entering a single one 10 times. But most people are against any change without giving it the slightest second of thought. It's like the middle ages all over again.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well not if we have a limit of multiple entries like 3 or 5 or 10 =)
Comment has been collapsed.
Comment has been collapsed.
I forgot to mention it in the post but I did search and found three threads from about 10 months ago about this: one, two, three. I read all the comments and couldn't really find a reason why this would be bad. People seemed to suggest that the discussion was old but I couldn't find any other threads about it. Maybe you could help if you know any? Thanks =)
Comment has been collapsed.
It would make it harder for people who want the game to get the game. as for every entry double the chance plus the other entries to get your % of actually winning. so increasing that number does not increase your chance to win...just your chance to lose
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm not sure I understand your math. If we for instance imagine that everyone could enter once or twice, you would double your chance of winning if only you entered twice and everyone else entered once. However, if everyone entered twice, your chance of winning would be the same as before when you could only enter twice. Since not everyone will enter twice, the new value of your chance of winning will be somewhere between the two, meaning you will increase your chances by entering twice. The same math would apply if the limit was 3 entries, and so on.
Comment has been collapsed.
that's only when you enter twice. if you only have enough points to enter once, then your chances are worse because somebody out there is going to enter twice.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well it's the same issue if you don't have enough to enter at all. Then your chances are not only worse, but zero. However, one would assume that you spend your points wisely and don't enter a bunch of random giveaways that you don't really want, especially when you know that you could enter twice for your favorite game.
Comment has been collapsed.
Good point. Maybe it should be restricted for public giveaways.
Comment has been collapsed.
Everyone deserves equal chance. Implementing this will only result in chaos. So my answer is no.
Comment has been collapsed.
That wouldn't be even sort of equal. Points are variable between games. Interest is variable between games; Frozen Synapse is not on my wishlist or one of the games I really, really want, but if I see one, I'll enter it. Someone else might really, really want Frozen Synapse, and thus enter it a shitton of times. Let's say ten. Suddenly, he has ten entries to my one. Because he wants something "more", he suddenly has ten times the chance of winning it that I do. Except, wanting something more is not a mathematically quantifiable value. Simply by having a varied taste and a list of games that I regularly enter longer than ten suddenly drops my chances of winning things. Between average entry numbers and varying points, the math of just "it's the same amount of points" doesn't really pan out as black-and-white as it seems. A simple equation can't possibly convey the full scope of it to determine whether or not, at the end of it, every single member has a fair shot. If even ONE member would somehow be at an advantage or disadvantage over it, it's suddenly not fair.
Comment has been collapsed.
But varying preferences and different wish lists give certain disadvantages to some users whether the limit is at one entry or more. Since the amount of points is limited, the users that choose to enter several times in one giveaway will not enter other giveaways that they don't want as much. Think of it as the placement of your games on your wish list. If you want a game more than another, you will place it higher. In this case, if you want a game more than another, you will enter more for it. The result would be that the entries are more specialized, rather than everyone entering everything because they have the points and don't want to see them lost.
Comment has been collapsed.
Varying preferences doesn't put people at a disadvantage by itself. People merely choose what they want to enter, and they have their entry in it. Once that happens, they are on equal footing for the game with everybody else.
I'm generally able to enter every giveaway for a game I want and rarely dip below 100 points, except maybe on a slow day. I'm able to go for everything I want. Such a system would suddenly hurt my chances of winning certain games because there's a demand for them. I fall into this middle ground that surely makes up a decent portion of the community; we have a lot of games that usually come up here, particularly the really expensive ones, but still lack certain games that come up frequently. I'm not the type to enter into a throwaway giveaway; anything I enter, I intend to play. Suddenly, that measure to prevent something I'm not gunning for lowers my chances.
There are a lot of ways to look at it, and the math for it, like I said, becomes a minefield of variables. The rationale for keeping it at one entry each is sound and seems the most fair to me.
Comment has been collapsed.
"I'm able to go for everything I want. Such a system would suddenly hurt my chances of winning certain games because there's a demand for them. I fall into this middle ground that surely makes up a decent portion of the community;"
Well, I don't have any statistics, but that is of course your individual situation. I, for instance, can usually only play mac games, so I don't tend to enter giveaways for games that don't work on mac. But that is my individual situation. As for one entry being the sound and fair option, I'd like to again compare to real life lotteries and such. The advantage we have over real life is that the points are distributed equally and therefore nobody will have an unfair advantage.
Comment has been collapsed.
Wrong. In real life, you buy your tickets, and you have a cieling based instead on how much you can afford to and are willing to buy. If somebody spends 1000 dollars a week playing the lottery, they're only hurting their own chances of making actual money back. Also, the odds work differently. The lottery pulls up a series of numbers, and if a ticket matches them, that ticket wins. Often, there isn't a winner and it gets rolled over to the next week. If I buy a hundred tickets with different numbers, it only increases my own odds of winning by covering more ground, without at all reducing someone else's chances. The only way it can is if my number comes up as the winner, but somebody else has the same ticket, which is a separate issue from the one at hand. On this site, every giveaway is guaranteed to end with a winner, so the higher the volume of entrants, the lower each individual entry has of coming up.
Comment has been collapsed.
Maybe "lotteries and such" was a bad description from me. There are "raffles" in real life, where you buy a certain amount of tickets and a winner is picked from those tickets.
Comment has been collapsed.
1,230 Comments - Last post 13 minutes ago by Draconiano
56 Comments - Last post 22 minutes ago by Mantve
47,113 Comments - Last post 39 minutes ago by Axelflox
16,338 Comments - Last post 44 minutes ago by Peiperissimus
119 Comments - Last post 53 minutes ago by Axelflox
57 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by pawelt
1,866 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by rongey420
132 Comments - Last post 16 minutes ago by cheeki7
53 Comments - Last post 16 minutes ago by cheeki7
9,558 Comments - Last post 17 minutes ago by PossiblePsycho
59 Comments - Last post 35 minutes ago by Ninglor03
14 Comments - Last post 37 minutes ago by Noxco
39 Comments - Last post 43 minutes ago by justachild8
24 Comments - Last post 50 minutes ago by Masafor
Since there are many users and most giveaways receive entries in the thousands, the chance of winning something is small. Combined with the fact that we get so many points constantly, I think many people are entering giveaways that they don't really need to enter, just so they can win something and because they don't want to waste the points by reaching the limit.
I would suggest that allowing multiple entries (perhaps with a maximum of 3 or 5 or even 10 depending on what's reasonable) for the same giveaway would solve this problem. This way, if you really want a game, you'll spend more on it and have a slightly higher chance of winning. Comparing it to the lottery, it's just like buying more than one ticket to increase your chances.
What do you think?
Edit
Comment has been collapsed.