I still have a bunch of bronze points from last year's promotion, but now you can't do anything with them.
Comment has been collapsed.
What are this points everyone write about? I always use my lockpicks to enter a giveaway :<
Comment has been collapsed.
You do realize that as the site grows and more people become active point generation will always increase? This doesn't do anything and is just more stupid nonsense that doesn't serve any real purpose but to confuse people.
Comment has been collapsed.
OP, If u seriously wanna find something to blame, blame the 300p cap. Some people are entering everything they can to win everything they dont really need, if u cant store the points, why not use it? aye?
*I spent a huge bunch of point on just civil 5/borderland 2/skyrim, I didnt still get lucky enough to win it. :(
Comment has been collapsed.
While I get the point of the cap, to prevent inactive people from suddenly being able to enter EVERYTHING once they build up a lot of points, I agree it doesn't work in these cases, because people will use their points just to avoid wasting them. It'd be much better if there was no cap, but built-up points degraded over time, as the giveaways that created the points close. I'm not entirely sure this is doable from a coding perspective, but I think it would make the outcome of having points reflect their intended purpose more accurately.
Comment has been collapsed.
well i dislike when ppl enter every game they saw even if those arent in their wishlists just to increase the chance of win something for free, meanwhile they might take a chance to won them face to the ones that really want those games badly. the points regenerate pretty fast, less points cap and slower points regeneration would be appreciated
Comment has been collapsed.
"well i dislike when ppl enter every game they saw even if those arent in their wishlists just to increase the chance of win something for free"
So if it's not on someone's wishlist, that means they don't want it or shouldn't be able to enter for it? What ridiculous logic. Also, last I checked, being able to win things for free is basically the whole point of this place.
There are plenty of games I see and think "oh that looks interesting, I'd like that", but maybe not badly enough to have it on my wishlist. I basically reserve that for things I really want. The fact that something's not on there doesn't mean I don't want it and it doesn't mean I shouldn't be able to enter for it.
Comment has been collapsed.
While the idea of entering only games in your wishlist was a bit incorrect, the core behind it still remains valid. It is not good when people enter for games they have no desire to play. I have witnessed enough cases to at least acknowledge that some do this.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well yes, I agree that people should only enter giveaways for games they actually want, I was just baffled by the implication that people should only enter giveaways for things on their wishlists. The fact that it's not on your wishlist doesn't mean you don't want it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Aye, it does not. People use wishlist in different ways and some may not use it at all. It doesn't really tell certainly what is desired and what is not.
Comment has been collapsed.
Nay! If those giveaways don't give points then the people that actually want to enter those exploited giveaways to get the game won't have the points to do so.
But i trust the moderators and the admins of SG and i think they know what's best for the site. If there is something that is breaking the site like you are saying those giveaways do, then i'm sure that they will do something about it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Christ, it's a website for generously giving free games to people. It's not a damn business, next to no one cares about the economy, and how does what people enter/don't enter even affect you? How is it any of your business in the first place?
As has already been stated multiple times, inflation happens in these economies you're getting so worked up about. If you're going to go on and on about the so-called economy here, you can't pick and choose which parts of an economy you want to apply to the situation.
When there are active bundles and promotions resulting in a large amount of Steam keys flying around, of course people will give them away, hence the points, as you know. People are still entering the giveaways however so obviously there's still demand for them. Bundles come out, not everyone is able to get them, they want the games in them. That's why they enter the giveaways. You could throw your "people are just spending points on random things right now because the points are regenerating so fast" argument at me now, but that still shows a demand for things - they need giveaways to spend points on. The fact that that's not the way you personally want to see points spent is your own issue.
People give games away, people enter to win them, they win, they're happy. This is why it's called "Steam Gifts", not "Steam Capitalist Exchange" or what-fucking-ever.
Quit making things needlessly complicated. Some people here get worked up over the most ridiculous things, I swear...
Comment has been collapsed.
This. The point of points is to increase odds of winning games people actually want. Because the percentage of giveaways one can enter remains relatively constant, I fail to see what the issue is. Points are having the same effect they always have; it's hardly causing any problems.
Comment has been collapsed.
If an increase in points had a negative effect, then you'd see the number of people entering giveaways dropping. I don't see that happening. Therefore I don't think this is causing real harm.
People will always enter for games they might not play, regardless of the number of points available. Most of the games given away on Steam Gifts are available for a very low price on sales or bundles. If people really wanted to play them, they'd buy them. Therefore most of the entries for most giveaways will be for games which aren't the most desired, and there's a chance the winner won't play them, or won't play them much. That's the nature of the "economy". There's no point in trying to affect a change to that nature just because it doesn't fit with what you'd like it to be.
Comment has been collapsed.
I have to agree with a lot, the points aren't really a economy, and these overwhelming bundles will be over soon, then things should calm down a lil bit. Its still good to have a lot of points for most of the time, wheres the point if, at some point, the majority of people got no points left at all?
Comment has been collapsed.
0 Comments - Created 2 minutes ago by DanteOP
444 Comments - Last post 4 minutes ago by Lessmessino
68 Comments - Last post 43 minutes ago by Reidor
1 Comments - Last post 51 minutes ago by Fitz10024
1,736 Comments - Last post 55 minutes ago by MeguminShiro
16,269 Comments - Last post 6 hours ago by MarvashMagalli
235 Comments - Last post 7 hours ago by Gorebelly318
32 Comments - Last post 14 minutes ago by JMM72
7 Comments - Last post 21 minutes ago by DeliberateTaco
119 Comments - Last post 38 minutes ago by NoctuaVentus
114 Comments - Last post 39 minutes ago by Fluffster
178 Comments - Last post 39 minutes ago by Noobdynone
4 Comments - Last post 40 minutes ago by Carenard
5 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Ekaros
IMO: I know this probably won' be popular, but all of these "Exploit/bundle giveaways" are spamming huge amounts of points, and ruining the economy of the site.
My suggestion, is to prevent "Exploited/Bundle Giveaways" (thats anything marked with an "*" when creating a giveaway), that these giveaways should NOT generate points to users. Currently, all giveaways created, generate some points to all users. Eliminating this for exploited/bundle, will IMO balance the economy of SG again.
This would make points have actual worth again. It would return users to the days where they had to decide on the games they cared about. To appreciate giveaways. As it is now, with the influx of points, people are just entering every giveaway, even if they don't want to play them.
What do you all think? Yay or Nay or maybe another option for economy balancing?
Comment has been collapsed.