Nice feature CG, this will definetly reduce the work for support/mod
Comment has been collapsed.
Great change. The less support tickets for stuff like this the better.
Comment has been collapsed.
and more sleep for the support team. It's a win-win-win.
SleepyCat ---> SleepingCat
Comment has been collapsed.
https://www.steamgifts.com/user/SleepingCat
Already taken :(
Comment has been collapsed.
Did this get activated already, saw I won Warhammer 🐀🌊 and I think my other entries were removed already 🤗
Thanks CG admin of SG, may the force be with you 😺🖖
Comment has been collapsed.
Maybe add a feature that if you sync with steam you get the points back from the giveaways you entered and now own. This way more peole will regularly update their Steamgifts Account and you would have even less rerolls.
I personally update my Steamgifts Account after every Bundle i buy to avoid this. But I am sure many people don't which results in work for the Support
Comment has been collapsed.
Seconding this. Maybe have it as an option that we can turn on and off, but I know I would rather hit sync once than go back and check manually when I activate a bundle with 10+ games.
Comment has been collapsed.
Suggestion - add button [leave all giveaways of this game] to page with won games/giveaways so people can leave giveaways of said game when they are ready (and their win is somewhat confirmed as legit).
Additionally when someone won giveaway but haven't seen it notification yet (as he could be offline at that time) giveaways that he entered for that game should stay untouched until there will be only 15 or 10 min remaining till end. Then there could occur automatic "leave" from such giveaways.
Comment has been collapsed.
Cheers mate! This is a useful one. Saves me the effort of searching for them and removing them manually. Though I honestly didn't expect the statistics that you provided at the end. Didn't know that such a huge number of the support tickets were for the same reason.
Comment has been collapsed.
You can still ask the second giveaway creator to reroll if you haven't use the key. Otherwise every time you win a giveaway the creator will waste support's time with a reroll request, not to mention potential blacklists. Plus you won't be able to join sgtools protected forum giveaways with the multiple win rule in place.
Comment has been collapsed.
You must have pressed received on both GAs which you shouldn't have done.
"Received" here actually means "received key or gift and activated it" when you obviously can't activate the same game twice on one account.
Comment has been collapsed.
After the site talking so long about why this implementation wouldn't work, it was certainly surprising to see you implement it so straightforwardly, especially without any forenotice. As noted by others, in past threads and here, this implementation seems to run contrary to the site's usual outlook, and supports its worst elements while being a negative element to legitimate users.
Honestly, the implementation itself seems certain to be a positive- less emphasis on P, more on fludity of site interaction- but at the moment it feels rushed and poorly thought through, especially in light of the delay on the announcement.
Also, "The main benefit of this update is the time and headaches it saves for everyone on the site." gives a rather incorrect impression:
This isn't going to reduce time spent on SG, it's going to increase it. Now users will have to worry about logging to manage P- both for making sure not to enter too many copies of the same game at once [thus encouraging much more frequent logins, to enter giveaways in groups rather than all at once], and for checking if they have P refunds to spend. This in no way whatsoever will alleviate focus from the site, and rather, seems certain to notably increase it for the userbase as a whole (with the notable exception of bot-users, who are now even more free to run rampant without concern.)
Likewise, managing P, worrying about P, or simply being annoyed about the extra uncertainty related to them- it's unlikely to reduce headaches for the userbase as a whole, even while it benefits staff members.
It is, of course, your prerogative if you want to focus on staff first. But emphasize that, not that this is in favor of the userbase- because, with you having implemented this without addressing these oft-cited concerns, or even referencing them, the "[for the sake of] everyone on the site" angle becomes a bit uncertain. At the moment, all we can see is- staff benefits aside- a system that heavily supports bot-users; that emphasizes the risk of potentially fake giveaways and thus adds further negative stigma toward any user without an established, positive reputation; and which makes P management even more micromanagey and unbalanced, and makes it less beneficial to enter longer giveaways early on, causing extra stress over having to keep watching over them..
The implementation really seems to just be a mess of concerns, right now.
Edit: There's also the fact that abruptly ganking away entries could leave giveaway creators in a lurch- some users intentionally will let an entry linger for minutes/hours if the giveaway is at 5 entries, rather than force the creator to scramble for new entrants.
Seriously, how is this reducing headaches. :P
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks Sooth for raising the sole actual issue here (which isn't fake gibs). Since long I think points should be re-managed so that on average the limit gets hit only once a day, which can be achieved with either or both increasing max-amount and decreasing regen-rate.
That would take away the bot advantage of spending more points than a single per day site visit can.
To also solve the current loss of refunded points, those simply could be allowed to go over-limit for this single case. AFAIK that even was the case with deleted gibs previously (SGv1 etc)
Comment has been collapsed.
Since long I think points should be re-managed so that on average the limit gets hit only once a day, which can be achieved with either or both increasing max-amount and decreasing regen-rate.
Personally, based off highlighted points in previous threads, I'm currently considering the following system as being favorable:
- Max point storage is upped to 800 ( honestly, active users can store points in giveaways they never plan to let end, already, so a smaller storage allotment doesn't really do anything but encourage actively checking the site non-stop, while giving uneven consideration to less active (yet respectful enough not to bot) users ).
- Point generation upon creation is reduced to 20% of its current value.
- Community wishlist top 100 games will generate an additional 120% of its current value upon ending with at least 1 entry.
- Community wishlist top 101-120 will generate an additional 100% of its current value upon ending with at least 1 entry.
- Community wishlist top 121-140 will generate an additional 80% of its current value (ie, totalling current value) upon ending with at least 1 entry.
- Community wishlist top 141-160 will generate an additional 60% of its current value upon ending with at least 1 entry.
- Community wishlist top 161-180 will generate an additional 40% of its current value upon ending with at least 1 entry.
*Community wishlist top 181-200 will generate an additional 20% of its current value upon ending with at least 1 entry.
(Top valuations aren't arbitrary- I noted notable changes in game rarity/interest at 100, 140, 160, 180, and 200 [after rounding to nearest 10] after which I added the 101-120 for a more fluid progression.)
It won't completely remove point flood where bundles with good games are involved, so you may still see multiple fills within the same day on busy days with high-interest bundles- but it should significantly reduce the pressure involved, cut down on Clickteam/etc point flood, and mitigate high interest (and thus less selective joining) by offering more points to the community by which to enter those giveaways with.
The higher cap and lower point generation (especially on junk bundle days) should help a lot with lessening the demand to check SG regularly, or to use bots in place of such interaction.
Wanna try picking apart at that? :)
refunded points
My thoughts on that, here. :)
Comment has been collapsed.
First of all, I like your logical way of reasoning, and often in other threads I completely agree with you, thank you for this.
But in this case I can't agree.
- I doubt it will increase site load, because I believe that quantity of points is important factor for this. Is someone have no spare time, or just not very interested - he won't come to site just because he have points. If someone come to site often - he will still come, even if he have no points. Actually, entering giveaways never takes much time, so even if this will change because of those changes - I don't think this will be critical for site load.
- Those changes influence points only in case you won. It's not so often event, changes to point flow can't be as critical as you say.
- If someone tends to spend all points - he will not lose much because of those changes, because points won't disappear, they just refresh faster (and only in case of winning, so not so often). If someone tends to have a lot spare points - it means he have no giveaways to enter, and thus even if some points will be wasted in case of win (not so often event) - he should not care, because he have no need of those points. So, in any case, those changes won't change anything dramatically for users.
So, I don't see much downside here, I believe you're exaggerating it. On the other side:
- As giveaway creator I suffer from rerolls caused by double wins a lot. I had 9 rerolls in my multikey last giveaway, and unsure if it's the end, because there is still users who haven't claimed their keys. I will benefit from this change.
- As giveaway participant - I've had cases of double wins too, in most cases when I asked giveaway creator for reroll - it was because of this. So, once again - I will benefit from this change.
So, saying that only support will benefit from this is definitely wrong.
Of course, there may be groups of people not so happy about this - some people concerned about micromanagement of points for example, may lose points sometimes (not often, even not every win will cause this), and considering the fact that point flow is already variable - I would say they won't even notice this. Also, from this change will suffer rule violators, who may want actually to win multiple keys - but I don't give a buck about their feelings.
Overall, I believe this change have much more positive than negative for the community.
Comment has been collapsed.
Been wishing for that, thanks cg! But consider implementing the safety lock Archie proposed!
Comment has been collapsed.
That problem exists for years. Why you add this feature this late?
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm starting to feel like I'm the only one who enjoys the default :/.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's not white! It is very very light blue :) I prefer dark themes also
Comment has been collapsed.
Nope, I can't stand dark themes. I get completely lost in them.
Comment has been collapsed.
Changed to a dark theme for one scroll of a page. Never again.
Comment has been collapsed.
Hey SG, I mentioned in a discussion yesterday that I was working on this feature, and I just wanted to write an announcement since it's complete. In short, when you win a game, the site will now check your other giveaway entries that are open, and remove those for the game you just won. It also works for giveaways ending at the same time. This helps to prevent you from accidentally winning a game more than once while you're sleeping, or away from the site.
FAQ
Does this happen when I win, or when I mark a gift as received?
It happens the moment you win. When users win a game more than once, it typically occurs before they even have time to visit the site. If we waited until a gift was marked as received, it would be too late in the majority of cases.
Do I get points refunded?
Yes, if any of your giveaway entries are automatically removed, we will refund the correct number of points, assuming you have less than the current maximum of 300.
Does this prevent all possibilities of winning a game more than once?
No, a user could still end up the winner of a giveaway, and then a different giveaway they entered in the past could be rerolled, causing them to have two wins for the same game. Or, a user could win a giveaway, believe they are not going to receive the gift from the giveaway creator, and start entering more giveaways for the same game, only to win again. We'll look at options to reduce these possibilities, but for now, this update covers most instances of multiple wins that we are seeing. Remember, if you ever win a game more than once, you should only redeem one copy, mark additional copies as not received, and ask those giveaway creators to request a new winner.
The main benefit of this update is the time and headaches it saves for everyone on the site. Last month we had 2,012 tickets requesting new winners because the current winners already won or purchased the game. That's nearly half of our Request New Winner tickets, or 25% of our total tickets. Overall, this is going to result in less explanations from giveaway winners, less tickets required from giveaway creators, and more sleep for the support team. It's a win-win-win.
Edit
This is now setup for rerolls as well. If a giveaway is rerolled and you're selected as the new winner, the site will remove your other giveaway entries that are currently open for the same game.
Comment has been collapsed.