This is really going to hurt how many flash giveaways (1 hour or a few hours) are created, which will hurt odds. Not a fan.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thank you for the update cg. I don't really agree with the static point distribution, but let's see how it turns out.
Let us know how many blacklists you gain from salty users after this lol
Comment has been collapsed.
- Users receive 5 points every 15 minutes.
- The point cap has been increased from 300 to 500 points.
Prior to this change, I had 300 points ... I now have 356 points ... is there a rounding error somewhere?
Comment has been collapsed.
Hey cbones, I added one point to every user when I took the site offline for the change to ensure everything was working as intended.
Comment has been collapsed.
Imo this new point system is utter bullshit, but lets see how it'll play out.
Comment has been collapsed.
Not really a fan of static point regeneration. Id have much preferred to just have the point regeneration reduced (probably by around half or so). Rest of the update seems pretty good though, especially the new cap
Comment has been collapsed.
10 giveaways to enter @ 500 points
10 000 giveaways to enter @ 500 points
MMMMMMMMM K
Comment has been collapsed.
Seems to be a good compromise. I wasn't much for the static number but having the cap to account for 24 hour is good.
Will most likely work out for the better. :)
Any thought on increasing the minimum time of giveaways? I'd be in favour of that, it helps with having to check the site more frequent.
Comment has been collapsed.
Non-dynamical point generation is easier to implement, understandable. In last thread there was pretty simple suggestion of dynamical statistically normalized to fixed-total distribution. Can be useful if you will decide to bring dynamics of GA creation in.
At least it would be important if "banking" points would be fixed. It is exploit to use GAs for banking. And it is total fail if person just stored points in some GA they didn't actually want, but didn't retrieve them in time and won a gift. Too often they can't refuse things they don't want. Points from removed entries either should not be returned at all, or should be returned only in some short interval of time.
Hopefully slower point generation making users entering less GAs will encourage users to choose more appealing, not just more expensive gifts. In this regard lowering maximal entry price to 50 is a bit strange. While it "helps" users to enter avalanche of 50p+ GAs from some bundle a couple of times per month, it fancies users who invest points in whatever is more expensive (disregarding what it is). But oh well, there is just too many of them anyway - basically everyone who doesn't play wins.
However it would be nice personalized solution to this and other issues if option for GA creator would be added to increase point entry price for their GA, up to some multiplier, so only really interested users who don't want much other gifts would participate. (for this "banking" should be dealt with, so that expensive GAs are not used just to keep points). Option of decreasing entry price should be approached cautiously as it could be exploited by some groups to make inner GAs cheaper, for easier CV rising schemes with exchanging trash/farming games, while spending more points in public GAs.
I guess increasing cap of points is friendly to users who can't visit forum few times a day.
Thanks for efforts.
Comment has been collapsed.
Too often they can't refuse things they don't want.
An excuse can be made fairly easily. Only issue is wasting time from support.
users who invest points in whatever is more expensive
Are there really those? I'm fairly sure people go rather into a $30 PUBG (wl rank #2) or $20 Bayonneta (#14) instead of a $60 DiRT Rally (#133)
if "banking" points would be fixed.
Let's take a situation: No wishlist GA left, but still some points left. To not waste the points people bank them and use them for wl GAs later.
Isn't that what you would like to see instead of them mindlessly joining anything for a +1? When banking were to get blocked instead, then people would just put the points 'somewhere'.
Why is banking bad when it actually makes people enter more for what they want?
Comment has been collapsed.
An excuse can be made fairly easily. Only issue is wasting time from support.
What excuses? Reroll can be requested without excuses, but it is the whole point that users wouldn't do that, but just take, obviously, what came their way even in result of accident with "banking". Of course refusing such gift so that someone who was interested in it, would be right, and spending support time for such positive thing can not be even counted as an issue -_- Real issue is not doing so.
Are there really those?
Right, probably even people who don't play anything or play only few percents of their wins, enter at first wled games, thinking that "they will have possibility to play them some day", but there is not many of these gifts, and outside of this, people are not so particular. Price of gift is more important for these users (which they could see with entry point cost, for example). Especially if game is not bundled.
These examples with points "left" and they for some mystical reason need to be spent anywhere, are just terrible. People don't have control over what they are doing, apparently they really need smaller cap to be forced to choose wisely. If banking would be fixed, at least some people anxious about these miserable things can spend time on something more clever.
People don't need to join anything mindlessly either, there are just some users who don't have a proper human reason. They will do all kinds of pathetic things whatever mechanics is. Masses of them are mindlessly entering every possible GA now. It will not get any worse in a grand scale without banking. At least these users would not get advantage over normal people when it comes to better games, let them eat trash if they want so.
Comment has been collapsed.
Terrible Idea, totally ruins the site, as a person in a third world country who can't buy games, i enter for every game i am interested in playing, now i cant, and i am losing out, there should have been a poll or some sort, these changes seem engineered to help people who can still buy games, who don't need/want to enter as many giveaways. Right now i am extremely frustrated that i can't enter giveaways for a game i would really like. Not impressed at all.
Comment has been collapsed.
Unless you won every one of these giveaways, you're not actually losing anything. You can join less giveaways but in return you have better odds at winning them because they will have less entries. You chances of winning something are probably higher now.
Comment has been collapsed.
Actually not to be frank, sure the odds are better now, but the amount of giveaways i can enter is vastly reduced, the better odds don't make up for it, so in the end i am losing out on chances.
Comment has been collapsed.
You'll know for sure by looking at your Probability of Winning Per Day stats after a couple of days.
Comment has been collapsed.
I know, i commented on it, but without a poll it is very hard to know the total consensus of the site.
Comment has been collapsed.
The problem with a poll is, that certain script makers can configure their script in a way to vote in the poll.
I -personally- prefer a thread so everybody who cares enough can comment. I would assume that cg got a good picture of the overal consensus. But I might be wrong.
Comment has been collapsed.
Just an observation I'm sure someone else has made by now, but most new games are $60 and you can only enter at 50 points, which would make it take longer to level up, correct (assuming that the value of a game past 50 no longer counts or matters anymore)? Seems at least in part counter intuitive to penalize people giving away something brand new. Unless, if you put up something that is $60 or $75 or $80 and you get the full credit but people entering only have to put up 50 points maximum, I guess that would be fine. It just seems a bit odd.
Comment has been collapsed.
The contribution value given to GA creators for such games doesn't change from before. Only the points required to enter is capped at 50.
Comment has been collapsed.
Ok thanks, just wanted to make sure that was still the case.
Comment has been collapsed.
The amount of CV you receive for giving away a game is not connected to the number of points it costs to enter a giveaway. With the old system, there was a limit where no matter the cost of the game, it would not cost users more than 100 points to enter, now that limit has been dropped to 50 points.
You get CV added to your account based on the full retail price of the game on Steam no matter what it cost to enter here. If you give away something worth $300, you get $300 of CV even though it only cost 50 points to enter. Temporary sales on Steam do not affect the CV you receive, but permanent price drops will.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'd change point generation to a bounded system based on what we had. Would be much better.
I'd then make unbundled games cost double points so bots don't join those willy-nilly.
Comment has been collapsed.
For me this change is a totally waste. It helps people entering every crap with maybe fewer entries in each giveaway.
but people who only join stuff they want are in total disadvantage since when there is finally 1 game they want tow in they have only their 300-500 points to try to win it. and since we know that most bundle games only have high ga amount on release you not getting points according to made giveaways you will miss out on alot of them.
in short this system highly advantages botter / people joining only for +1, while letting out people who enter only Games they are really interested in.
Comment has been collapsed.
You still can, but you are forced to "stock points" in giveaways you leave.
Not the most userfriendly system but apparently one now required to use on SG for the intended purpose ("winning games you want", but not actually being given the TIME to do so, needing 2.5 hours for a 50P game with a 1-hour min.).
Comment has been collapsed.
no i cant, since unless morons who think they need to spent each one of their points i blacklist all games that doesnt interest me.
cant enter stuff i dont even see even.
and i dont see why i have to visit the site now way more frequently and play around banking because of other people either.
same as that people who make now fake giveaways with expensive stuff damage you really.
this whole system is made for the people you should care least for.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't like it either.
But just presented you a workaround we currently use, the only option we got sadly enough.
Just had to "deposit" a bank too for 4 wishlisted HOGs who appear on a 1-hour limit, which is 40 points (2 hours).
Banking and spending more time here managing points seems to be the new way, kinda contradicting the whole "this was made so people can just login once a day instead of being glued to SG".
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't think that we need to change minimum giveaway time. It should be comfortable to giveaway creator.
For example, hes coupon will be "burned" soon, with 2 hours for example. And with the changes to giveaway time, he will not be able to create giveaway with this coupon.
Less giveaways =/ good change.
What about point ststem.
Currently it seems like OKAY, for me it makes no changes, but when the new Humble Bundle with expensive games will be started, here might be more dissatisfied users :)
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't like that. Big disslike. More giveaways should be more points.
Comment has been collapsed.
Any chance we can get a legit point bank so that people avoid using long(er)-running giveaways for storage?
That would improve QoL for those of us who'd rather save points for future GAs we may want to enter, also decreasing requests for re-rolls.
Comment has been collapsed.
I heard this one is legit! xD
Comment has been collapsed.
You have one, and it can store up to 500 points at a time. ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
In case you don't understand the problem: some of us visit the site on a daily basis, and yet don't have anything to spend points on; we just don't enter everything that is on display.
Regardless of where you stand on this, it can't be changed: we're allowed to enter giveaways for games we don't want, for the only purpose of storing points. Making a regulated point bank would:
a) save people the time and hassle to enter those GAs, and to leave them when they're not need anymore.
b) eliminate the risk those GAs are won by users who didn't really want the games, who would then need to ask for a re-roll.
That doesn't seem a bad deal to me, for anyone involved.
Comment has been collapsed.
I visit the site on a daily basis (usually multiple times a day) and I never spend all my points because it's rare that there's enough interesting GA for me. I have a full point bank 90% of the time.
Having a spearated point bank would be almost the same as increasing the points cap. What is the difference between having a 500P cap + a 500P bank vs a 100P cap? Beside of course having to manually store the points in it vs points being automatically added to it.
This doesn't seem like a good deal to me, for anyone involved.
Comment has been collapsed.
Nice for some reason~~
So that I can regularly use my point
Comment has been collapsed.
RIP entering all giveaways for wishlist games that get bundled. Bad change, in my opinion. Should just have banned the bots and call it a day.
Comment has been collapsed.
i don't like this change. Said it in the previous thread as well.
Comment has been collapsed.
I think it's human nature to feel that something has been taken from you when you can join fewer giveaways even though you have approximately the same (or even very slightly higher) chances of winning overall now, because of the lower number of entries. cg, I think you will see a lot of dislike for the change even though on the whole real people should be winning slightly more giveaways because bots will be winning fewer.
Essentially points just suddenly got a lot more valuable because they are now more scarce. It will however take some time for people to realise this and get used to their new value. When spending points on a giveaway, you're now investing more point "value" to buy a higher chance of winning than before.
The kneejerk reaction will be to see fewer points to spend and so feel that one has less "point value" to spend now.
Comment has been collapsed.
Hi SG,
After the recent discussion, updates to the point system are now live. They are as follows:
I think these adjustments will provide a number of improvements for the site. However, I'll keep an eye on user feedback, and try to make sure the changes are working as intended and meeting the needs of the community.
Comment has been collapsed.