( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
1st
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Comment has been collapsed.
There's already a group like that, and a script to do the checking for you.
https://www.steamgifts.com/discussion/T80Im/playing-appreciated-giveaways-with-the-intention-for-the-games-to-be-played-within-a-month
And the recurring monthly play your wins thread:
https://www.steamgifts.com/discussion/gmJ05/june-is-play-a-game-you-won-on-steamgifts-month
Comment has been collapsed.
that's like giving a homeless some cash and he's whiping his ass with it and looking at you like 'you got more fam?'
That literally brought tears to my eyes from laughing. So spot on! xD
Also where's the plot bruh?! D:< ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Edit: Nvm, plot found. Didn't see the comment :P
Comment has been collapsed.
that's like giving a homeless some cash and he's whiping his ass with it and looking at you like 'you got more fam?'
LOL. Really sad, but true, nonetheless.
I found very similar results when I conducted a similar research. Even my Whitelist GAs were not being played. Only a small % of the winners actually tried their wins and don't even get me started on public GAs. They are the worst.
The only solution that I found is to whitelist people that play their wins and create most giveaways for them and for groups that require their members to play their wins.
Btw, congrats on playing most of your wins. In an old thread. I only manage to find 16-17 people that tried most of their wins. :/
Comment has been collapsed.
When I started here I had the same opnion about GAs. I thought that lvl 0 people were just poor and because of that they deserved it more than higher level folks, but I was wrong. I almost stopped creating public GAs when I found out that most of the lvl 0 users are bots, rule breakers and even worse, people with much more games than me... and at that time I wasn't even considering playtime as a valid metric, I'm sure I'd find worse results with a closer look.
Tbh, a lot of higher level folks also don't play their wins. A bunch of well-known SGers with amazing ratios have never played any of their wins and that's even sadder than the number of lvl 0 folks that do the same. All in all, That's the reason I "cleaned" my WL a month ago and I'm mostly only creating WL and group GAs for people that I know will give it a shot.
With that said, I respect that you don't give a fuck and keep doing what you've been doing since the beginning here. I wish I could be more like that, but tbh I just can't. It bothers me to no end, especially within WL GAs. :/
Anyway, Welcome back and I hope the winner of your next GA will, at least, try the game. :)
edit: you should definitely take a look at the "Actually Playing Games" group and BLAEO.
Comment has been collapsed.
I was just about to search for that thread to link it here but I guess now I don't need to, so yaaaaay. :D
Statistics on the matter are still super depressing though... :/
Comment has been collapsed.
Sure I would. I just needed to search through my Messages history until I ran into the one from that thread. ;P
Comment has been collapsed.
Why do you keep making public no level giveaways then? Xcuse my boldness, but I really wonder. At the same time you post this rant you're throwing out Playerunknown Battlegrounds into the dumpingpit that is the level 0 public SG memberbase.
Comment has been collapsed.
because some people cannot effort to buy games to giveaway but like to play some nonetheless
Well, for instance, even though i am also in the same situation as those people who can't afford games, i have made certain efforts in the past to increase my SteamGifts level so as to have a higher chance at winning a game i desire by entering higher level giveaways.
and i don't like restrictions
To do high level giveaways (restricting lower levels, mainly "Level 0") isn't "discrimination", nor is it a restriction per say. It's "giving a better opportunity to the people who also made the effort to give back".
if you like throwing your money away without bothering what happens with it, your business, i don't really care.
I didn't get that part :(
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh, right. I couldn't place it in the context. Now i understand.
Yeah, you're totally right. It's not worth it.
So then maybe, instead of our advice (higher level giveaways), you should really create that group that you talked about.
At least there you could make sure that the people winning would actually play what they won.
Sorry for not fully understanding :)
Comment has been collapsed.
Dunno, it does sound like the appropriate place for that game… :3
Comment has been collapsed.
but would you make a giveaway if the winner doenst even start the game.
Yup, i completely understand.
For instance, i know a person who won "PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS" over a month ago and has only played the game for 4 hours...that's it...4 hours in more than a month...
(and we're talking about a "Top Seller" and an overall incredibly fun game)
And there are a lot of people like me who have been wanting PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS since it came out about 3 months ago, and who would have sunk in at least 300 to 400 hours in the month between winning and today...
i'll stop making public giveaways and switch to group giveaway where people can come together and enjoy the purpose of this site; make giveaways, win stuff and PLAY stuff.
Good emphasis on "PLAY".
A group like that really sounds like the proper way to go at this point. (or, as others have stated, merely increase the giveaway level)
I personally don't care about contributor level
Well, unfortunately i must disagree with that statement. You see, the thing is, (and this is just my opinion), a very high percentage of people who have given back to the community (namely people who "invested" in SteamGifts) would prefer higher level giveaways because of two crucial factors:
1 - Most of the people here who haven't even reached "Level 1" enter giveaways "just for the heck of it", as a "Why not?" thing, and some of them actually win and just let the game "rot" in their Steam Library.
(and this is where i was booed when elaborating my point of view; i merely asked that certain PUBG giveaway creator to raise the giveaway level to at least "Level1+" so that the game might finally go to someone who would play it, and not some random/fake account, like the guy who played PUBG for 4 hours during the course of a month...)
- "But what is your point of view based on, exactly?" you might ask.
2 - Well, now we get to the second potential factor. In my view (at least this is what i've been doing), people who have increased their SteamGifts level have not only given back to the community, but have increased it to be able to participate in higher level giveaways regarding their wishlisted games (games they actually intend to play), therefore having a bigger chance at winning something they will actually play. So you know that they are serious about playing the games they won because they "invested" in the opportunity to enter higher level giveaways, increasing their overall luck because they really desire specific games on their wishlist.
Like i said, this is only my opinion, but it's what i, personally, have been doing. Increasing my level not only shows that i have given back to the community, but it also gives me the opportunity to enter higher level giveaways concerning my wishlisted games because i really intend to play them.
Also, two more things:
-
Your .gifs are awesome!
-
You're even more awesome!
Cheers.
(i would also have liked to ask you to increase your giveaway level, but i won't because the giveaway has already been posted, and also because i risk being "hated" for expressing myself again)
Comment has been collapsed.
the thing with the level is like showing off like who got the largest dick.
Not exactly...a higher level could express many things.
In my opinion, though, it not only expresses the fact that they have given back to the community, but also the fact that they are serious about playing the games they won because they "invested" in the opportunity to enter higher level giveaways, increasing their overall luck because they really desire specific games on their wishlist.
Comment has been collapsed.
Really? Damn...
I mean i can understand farming small, underrated games...but "AAA" games? Why would someone enter a giveaway for a Top Selling, High Rated, "AAA" title just to farm it?
:(
Comment has been collapsed.
My best guess is that many of those people also do that with games they buy themselves (including recent AAA games for people who can afford that). And then they take that same kind of "I'll probably play it eventually" or even "+1" thinking to SG, but fail to respect (or even think about?) the fact that someone else is involved when you win a game here without any kind of monetary compensation, unlike when they buy it or trade for it themselves.
Comment has been collapsed.
The highest levels have the lowest play rates. Maybe even worse than level 0. Most of the level 8–10 user base is nothing but game collectors who sometimes do not even get around even idling the won games for cards.
Not to mention that if you do the price of won minus price of sent calculations, you may find that the top levels are not that far away from deficit as the lowest ones. It's just everyone looks at the sent ones and the site only cares about the sent ones.
If you really want to look at those worth praising, look around in the level 4-7 range. It is the least problematic range on this site if you really cover all possibilities.
Comment has been collapsed.
Interesting information. Thanks for the "heads up".
Comment has been collapsed.
Assuming it has cards, 4 hours means they probably idled it, not played it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, Steam says that PUBG doesn't have cards. So he must not have liked it or something...but i mean "Come on!", it's not only a Top Seller, but an overall awesome game...
So why enter for such a "wanted" game if (while others "drool" over the feeling of owning and playing it) you're not going to play it? :(
Sure, i won't lie, i've also farmed a lot of games since the time i created my Steam profile (and, quite honestly, who hasn't?), but they were crappy games won in instant giveaways on even crappier websites (you know...) and at least i played each and every one of them (more or less) to categorize which is awesome and which is not. And as for "AAA" titles, almost each and every single one of them in my Library have been played (again, more or less) and as for the others, i'll get to them eventually.
But again, you don't just leave a game like PUBG to "rot"...you play the hell out of it "here and now, while it's fresh".
This is why i would love it if giveaway hosts would put appropriate levels to the games they are giving away. (the more awesome the game, the higher the entry level, so you know that who wins it is a higher level because he "invested" in SteamGifts to have better luck at winning something he really wants and will actually play)
Comment has been collapsed.
Top seller means little. No Man's Lie was top seller. Assassin's Creed: New Orleans (a.k.a Mafia 3) was top seller. And we all know how they turned out to be.
MYCAPSLOCKISSTUCK's Battlegrounds is a popular game and many kids feel inclined to jump on the bandwagon, but that doesn't mean that a mass multiplayer deathmatch clusterfuck is everyone's cup of tea. Many new and upcoming AAA games are "popular", but not all of them end up getting even finished. Or, heck, played.
Comment has been collapsed.
That is the SG community wishlist, in a nutshell. With a few exceptions.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, you really should know that the hit ratio will be quite bad, as even on the top levels, the people who actually open a giveaway page instead of using a bot or a one-click entry are in the single digits in percent:
https://www.steamgifts.com/discussion/EWTuj/so-about-this-whole-reading-descriptions-thing-another-experiment
You probably get more coverage just by keeping this thread in the most recent discussions than by dropping IONLYWRITEINLARGELETTER's Battlegrounds among the wolves.
Comment has been collapsed.
I am biased so my advice would not mean much. I think that game is exactly the kind of junk that is suited for the level 0 plebs and would not really cause any harm if the winner never starts it up. On the other hand, it is good to generate clicks.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm sorry to have to say this, but considering the fact that i, personally, would cherish having this game and no less than thousands of hours would be spent playing it (if i win, since i do have a chance), that would be a "dick move".
No offense...but please don't do that. Even a 0.0001% chance of me winning it still gives me hope :(
Comment has been collapsed.
And yet i played a bit of both NMS and M3 at a friend and i "fell in love" with both...
many kids feel inclined to jump on the bandwagon
Not necessarily...i mean personally, i like PUBG very much and would spend hundreds or even thousands of hours playing it... (and i'm 28)
It all depends on "taste" in the end, i guess.
Comment has been collapsed.
Maybe the person thought he would like it, but ended up not liking it?
I have had the same issue with some GA's I won. I really wish I could unbind those games from my account and give them back to the creators :/
Comment has been collapsed.
As some people have mentioned, maybe you can join the playing appreciated group and make GA over there. Here are why I recommend it.
1) Everyone has equal chance to join this group. Plus, people who joined this group will most likely notice your thread and understand your concern.
2) People have to play their win. So, they will be more careful to choose what games to enter. As a result, your game will win by someone who really enjoys it.
LUFFY, you need partners!
Comment has been collapsed.
Wait, you want to somehow change all the users? I don't think it's possible.
Also, your data surprised me. I know that that most of the sg users don't give a shit about playing their won games, but i always thought they enter them to idle cards. But you showed me that 70% never even opened them. So i have no idea why they enter. +1 to library?
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, the group runs on a script where the groupcreator can see who broke the rules (of not playing their won game). So I doubt you will encounter mamy peoply who enter your GAs without the intention to play it.
Comment has been collapsed.
One of those scripts or whatever told me I have played 75% of my winnings, however some of them are not correctly recorded. Some of my winnings have been played offline, so no achievements or time were saved. I do know some of my winnings have been unplayed, however, i'll play them. (talking about we are the dwarves or blackguards).
I don't know if that qualifies me as Anal, however ill try my luck in the battleground
Comment has been collapsed.
No, sorry, But it was in several threads, maybe a couple of weeks ago, one of those "do you play your winnings?" and such
Comment has been collapsed.
I think it's this one: https://www.steamgifts.com/discussion/NyDOv/tool-do-you-even-play-bro-gmtm-userscript
Comment has been collapsed.
In my case, take Undertale for example. I've only played it for ~90 minutes but through Family Sharing my son has completed the game 3 times. Everyone in the family likes different types of games, most of which I would not play, but they DO get played by someone.
Comment has been collapsed.
I've had really good experiences with the Playing Appreciated group recently but those were for gibs for rather niche games (FTL and Ronin) with level restriction.
If you go AAA or without level restriction I doubt the results would be as good...
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, it's something I'm trying to do better with. I'll be the first to admit my play / win ratio is currently not very good. For me, I'll see a giveaway and think it looks really cool, but I already have a bunch of games that I've started and end up playing one of those instead. And I have so much in my backlog already, and enough games that when I do have the time to play something it's often hard to decide what.
Anyways, I'm trying to cut back on entering giveaways until I've finished more of my wins here. I certainly don't want to seem unappreciative of the games I've won, though unfortunately that's how it comes off if I'm not playing them. For this reason, I can't really judge any of the winners of my giveaways (except in Playing Appreciated, which as others have suggested seems to be a pretty good solution).
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm the same as well. My backlog is way too big, and I don't have enough time in the day to play as much as I would like. I like to try and focus on one game as well so it takes me longer to get through anything. Luckily I haven't won too many games lol.
Comment has been collapsed.
i only enter in GAs for wishlisted games or interessants games because i'll need play then. it's my form of dont take off the chance for someone plays a game i don't really want (and this help me to have a positive ratio here). but i have a problem: a center all my time on little numer of games and much others still on my "wait list", the majority then i buied. So, i think already doing as you spoke here. And this is the correct thing. Let me know about your group, when you make him. [sorry about my bad english]
Comment has been collapsed.
kind of big valkue of 0 hrs, especially you make really great GAs as I recall :) looks like people will never cede to astonish me :(
Comment has been collapsed.
I totally share your frustration and wholeheartedly agree with you. It's heartbreaking to see so many games and money being wasted.
Comment has been collapsed.
I only enter giveaways for games I am interested in playing, probably why I only won 1 game so far :P
And I do understand. It's like giving someone a birthday present only to find out that that person gave your present to someone else, or just tossed it in the trash...
Comment has been collapsed.
but would you make a giveaway if the winner doenst even start the game.
Like I've said multiple times it boggles my mind to see some people have so little respect for other people's money, time and generosity that they enter giveaways just for a +1 and a few cents in cards.
Since I've discovered that userscript that lets you check the % of games played I've been repeatedly disappointed by some people, it's pretty depressing really :w
Comment has been collapsed.
You created so many nice giveaways in public and with no restrictions that you gave an impression you really don't care where gifts and money go. Everything you now are talking about is quite an ordinary conclusion of many who checked their past giveaways' destiny. I would say 95% of games I have given away were not played or tried properly, and this didn't depend on how good and expensive games were.
And what these people answer if I contact them - "I have 2000 games in backlog" (before my gift, apparently), "Sorry I don't have time to play all these games, obviously" etc. They think it is completely normal to take everything going their general direction and react to question "Why did you take part in GA if you are not playing" as I am an alien.
Playing Appreciated is too big group. I joined and created GA, game wasn't played ever. Winner is not in this group anymore, apparently got kicked but the fact is that it is not a panacea. Playing-gifts statistics of some of group members are horrible.
In APG I applied, and they didn't ever answer why whey don't want to invite me, while their members don't look really good according to statistics and requirements either. Whatever.
You could be right about meaningless of joining any groups, there will be just a small bunch of people and there is still almost none guarantees winners won't just wipe their ass with your gift, probably spending some "fuck you" time. And you lose possibility to choose anything yourself.
I wouldn't care about who is the winner as long as they play the game, but there is no way to control that in public/puzzles etc. Trying to manage WL with people who play games, but this feels a bit wrong. Creating own group for own GAs, checking winners and kicking people out would seem even much worse, not fun at all. I don't know what to do with this gifting not to feel sad and unsatisfied so often. Such a disappointment is probably the main reason why givers drop SG.
Comment has been collapsed.
Hey, about APG, the recruiter, Tso, was on a break and now the group is waiting because we're voting some changes. The thread is even closed right now. At least, that's the reason they haven't answered to anyone, AFAIK. I'm sure you'll get an invite when everything is settled, considering your profile!
If you want, I could ask him later about it. :]
Comment has been collapsed.
No, thanks Lastm, please don't bother with it. Just let's see what comes next, either way is same for me globally.
Comment has been collapsed.
In APG I applied, and they didn't ever answer why whey don't want to invite me, while their members don't look really good according to statistics and requirements either. Whatever.
The person running the group went through some personal issues. I'm not going to give any details, but he was away for a while to work on those.
The APG group stats are not amazing, but at least there are strict guidelines for when games should be played that you win in the group. Strict but not unreasonable. You could always apply again and see if you get a response.
edit And this is why you don't leave the thread open when you go to brush your teeth and prepare for bed-time, because others are able to sneak in their replies before you. Well, if 26min counts as "sneaking in"
Comment has been collapsed.
Hi Lilith812. I will take full responsibility for our failure to invite you to APG. As some others have mentioned, we're going through some internal changes at the moment- and unfortunately amid all that, you and a few others slipped through the gaps and we missed sending you an invite. I'm really sorry about that.
Comment has been collapsed.
Hi, I'm here in order to represent a few of those people who don't play their wins, just to try to make you feel a little better if I'm able.
Since I joined I haven't played a single game that I have won for many reasons. These might or not be the same for some but they are in my case.
1) I'm currently going to the university, so for 4 months I have to minimize my play-time, that means either play games that are easy or not too addictive.
2) Some games aren't my priority and will be postponed till I decide to give it a try. Ex: Plague Inc (Since I already played the flash and mobile versions) or Saints Row 2 (I need to play the first part before I start with this one).
3) Bought God Eater 2 and Resurrection and gave it most of my attention.
4) I have other games in my "to play list", imagine that I still haven't played none of The Witcher franchise and Dark Souls.
I hope that this helps you to feel a bit more at ease and maybe just maybe, give you another point of view.
Comment has been collapsed.
Because I will play them eventually. But with University I have 4 months of hell but then it's like 3 months of liberty to play as much as I can and want.
I understand your point though, just wanted you to know that some of us actually care for the games we win, it's just a matter of not having the time or a series of unfortunate events.
Comment has been collapsed.
Saints Row isn't really the kind of game where you necessarily need to have played the first to understand the 2nd. (Does the first even exist on PC. At least not on Steam...)
Actually unless you are very used to playing old games you're gonna have a hard time with SR. Even the 2nd part hasn't aged very well and the vehicle controlls are just plainly terrible by nowadays standards.
Comment has been collapsed.
SR1 was never released on PC.
Part of the reason why SR2's vehicle controls are so terrible is that the game runs at the wrong speed. The game speed is dependent on your processor speed, like a mid 80's DOS game would be, and so if you have a faster processor than expected, it will run faster. This is clearly noticeable if you play the game in multiplayer, as the timer will run at a different speed for each player as long as they don't have identical processors. Fans have made a utility that lets you get the game to run at the right speed (it's still a hassle as it requires a lot of manual work), but once the game runs at the proper speed, the vehicle controls are not that bad. They're still not great, but they feel far more manageable
Comment has been collapsed.
The sad thing is I played Saints Row 2 on XBox 360 and the vehicle controls were still awful. (maybe they had a similar issue there) I'm aware I'm comparing to the genre primus right now but in GTA (any of the "new" 3D GTAs) when I make a turn I can feel the weight of the car shifting to the side, the car slides a bit in my original direction and depending on my speed the car might even tip. And all of that feels very lifelike.
It's been a while since I played Saint's Row 2 but when I make a turn there the car turns exactly on the spot I initiated the turn like it was driving on rails and when I break the car instantly stops like the game has no physics whatsoever. Not to mention when you hit somebody with your car they often just keep standing upright in front of your car and you can shove them around like a cart in a supermarket.
In conclusion I'm trying really hard right now to come up with any open world game that has as bad vehicle controls as SR2 but I can't come up with one.
Edit: On 2nd thought: It's not just the controlls... It's also physics and everything else involved in driving because controls alone would just explain some of the issues I just mentioned.
Comment has been collapsed.
Game with worse vehicle controls than SR2?
Just Cause 1.
It's possible that I might have slowed down the game a bit too much when I tweaked my SR2, because while I do remember the crash physics being wonky as heck, turning did not feel completely unnatural. It was by no means great, and there was a lot of room for improvement, but it felt like I was in control of the vehicles at least. Before tweaking things, the vehicles might as well have been on ice.
But no, the issue was not present on the 360. It's quite possible that the only place where it ran at the correct speed was on the 360 itself, because that's the processor speed it was designed around.
Comment has been collapsed.
but it felt like I was in control of the vehicles at least
Actually that was the main problem to me: The cars reacted exactly like I steered them which felt completely unrealistic for me...
It's a bit tricky to explain in english but when I drive a car in real life it won't do exactly what I tell it to because my "steering imput" gets altered by physics... In SR2 it felt like that didn't happen at all. The car just did exactly what I told it to do. No stopping distance, no centrifugal force... no nothing.
I've only played a little bit Just Cause after already being familiar with JC2 so I'll have to trust you on that. As far as I remember driving was ok-ish, definitely not great, but (after having played JC2) my main thought was Where is my grappling hook ? I mean sure, parashoots are nice but without my trusted hook they are USELESS! :D
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm used to play old games. Last year I played Resident Evil 4 for the first time, this year was Silver (4th time), Republic Commando (like 10th or more) and now I'm currently playing Warcraft III.... again (lost the count of times I finished it).
Comment has been collapsed.
Then it won't be as much of a problem for you but keep in mind there is no PC version.
Also not every game ages at the same speed... I haven't played strategy for ages but I'm pretty sure Warcraft III with Frozen Throne is to this very day one of the best strategy games that exist and I assume en par with Starcraft 2.
Because... sure even in a genre like strategy they can try out new stuff (Company of Heroes, Dawn of War...) but what is there to improve on the classic W3 formula ?
Comment has been collapsed.
One thing that does make WC3 feel a bit old is how zoomed in it is. Actually, in this regard it has aged worse than say the original Command & Conquer.
I was never a fan of WC3. I always thought it felt so small-scaled, and as clunky as Spellforce might have been, I thought it mixed RPG & strategy elements better.
Comment has been collapsed.
To be honest I'm lacking the comparision to Spellforce because I didn't play it back in the day but I heard a lot of good stuff about it from friends. For me Warcraft 3 was the first strategy game I played that brought hero units into the game and for me that was a rather big game changer. I was never particularly good at it but we played it a lot in LAN multiplayer back in the day and I even witnessed the birth of the MOBA genre (a genre I couldn't really warm up to again after that)...
You're probably right about the zoom factor... it's been so long ago and Absence makes the heart grow fond.
Comment has been collapsed.
What I loved most of WC3 wasn't the mechanics (that too) but the story and the world presented in itself. If I had to say game with better strategy elements, that would be AoE.
Also I prefered WC3 because the units had much more impact than in AoE so that was another reason why I prefer one over the other.
Comment has been collapsed.
You make me feel old when you call those games "old" :P I just played through Noctropolis for the first time, a game released in 1994. Last month I beat Menzoberranzan, Call of Cthulhu: Shadow of the Comet and Call of Cthulhu: Prisoner of Ice. And I've got Dark Sun: Shattered Land, Dark Reign & History Line: 1914-1918 installed.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's not that they are the only one I played but the most recent ones. I could also name the first Final Fantasy (which is my favorite of the franchise), Doom (which was the first game I played), Comix zone (my childhood's nightmare) or even the good old Duck Hunt.
Comment has been collapsed.
I get you, real vehicles have inertia. It might, as I said, simply have been a case of me having slowed down the game a tad bit too much, but it felt like the cars did have some inertia in SR2 when I played it. Not quite a realistic degree, but some. And if vehicles have no inertia in games, then that actually makes them harder to control, as they don't respond the way you expect them to.
I found the controls in Just Cause one to just be terrible in general. And the physics engine was really borked as well. And everything just felt so floaty. I was not a fan at all.
Comment has been collapsed.
Inertia. Yeah, that was the word I was looking for :D
Well my backlog is so long I never really intented to go "back" to the first one anyway.
Maybe I'll manage to kill Baby Panao someday... That POS helicopter keeps killing me in the arena in the last mission and since you have to infiltrate a whole base first until you get to that part of the mission it's not really motivating to get back into the game and try again.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks to one of my friend (LastM, in the group I have founded) I discovered the joys (and sadnesses) of that script.
There is always room for improvement, of course, but I am striving to do my best.
Also, I discovered a group I think it could fit your needs: Playing Appreciated, which probably you already know.
Good luck for everything!
Comment has been collapsed.
LEEEEET'S GET ROOOOOIGHT INTO THE NEWWWWWS
so i was taking a 2 month break from steamgifts to play my wins and here's the interesting part (for me at least): i really enjoyed some of the games, on the hand i entered in the past alot of random giveaways just to win something and some of these killed me a lil bit inside because it was obviously bad, however it was a really fun ride and i enjoyed it.
now the bad news.
i made this decision because i asked myself, what is the purpose of steamgifts? to gift random people games and have fun, right? but would you make a giveaway if the winner doenst even start the game. that's like giving a homeless some cash and he's whiping his ass with it and looking at you like 'you got more fam?'
this reached a point for me where i'll stop making public giveaways and switch to group giveaway where people can come together and enjoy the purpose of this site; make giveaways, win stuff and PLAY stuff.
I personally don't care about contributor level or wins/sent ratio if you enjoy playing the stuff you win, i'll eat your a..NO STAHP NO
i made a lil chart just to show what i mean and i think most of you know what im talking about.
info to chart here: i took 100 of my ga's and checked them one by one. my stats if you're interested:
Avg. Games with ≥1 Achievement: 94.2%,
≥25% complete: 63.5%,
completed: 15.4%
ill still post super research material and everyhing is going to be the same .
ill create a group soon if im not lazy and let you know here, maybe you got a suggestion just go on an let me know.
i hate typing long things so bye.
i like saying i
i
i
i
ay
ay
bay
Comment has been collapsed.