I'm against any raising for a pretty simple reason. In according to fancy value-calculator site my Steam account is currently worth 140$ of non-bundled games. (One year ago it was approximately 40$) I checked retrospectively 5 months ago to found I passed registration by 4-7$. Not like I'm a wonderful person or a gift to the community but it would be really nice of you not to mark someone as a leecher preemptively.
I would rather see banning forever those who prove themeselves being assholes(regifting etc.) but that's for another topic.
Comment has been collapsed.
"Not like I'm a wonderful person or a gift to the community"
Well, you're certainly more of an asset to the community than OP, going by your gift history anyway. If you hit me up on Steam, I wouldn't mind helping you out a bit getting your game count up.
Comment has been collapsed.
well, perhaps make it depend on country where persons live.
i think this site is a good thing for people who cannot afford games because they are too expensive in their country.
so just make it 20% of average monthly salery in the country a person lives in or so.
Comment has been collapsed.
oh yes,maybe we even show our tax declaration upon registration...
seriously, there are countries some people earn 100 times more than others , something like an average monthly salary does not tell you anything about abilities of an individual.....and.....in rich countries poor peoples money is worth less
Comment has been collapsed.
...thats one question the other is what is the purpose of a minimum library value .. Keeping the User Count low? .blocking alts? increase the "quality" of users cause higher library value = higher probability they do GAs?
We could also discuss about the steamaccount age, but it´s also parameter that does not say anything about karma ;-)
I think the best solution, let register all accounts that are at least 6 month old with at least 30$ worth...and let those that do the GA decide if the wish any further hurdles...like CV, account age, Lib-value, bra-size or whatever
Comment has been collapsed.
The purpose of the library value limit isn't to stop leechers; it's to stop people from creating multiple accounts. Raising that number won't decrease the number of leechers any. You could make it $1000 and I don't think you'd see the sudden increase in gifting volume you're hoping for. People don't give more just because they have more games.
Comment has been collapsed.
Honestly ... I think this whole discussion is rather stupid. Just keep it as it is. If you don't like people leeching on the giveaways you're making then add a CV requirement. The whole point of a giveaway is to make it so that everyone has a fair chance at getting the prize. Plus, yes, if you can afford to give games away ... why make it so that only the people who can afford to get games be able to enter the giveaway?
Also, I saw mention of a separate Premium site with a higher Steam library requirement. Sure. Why not? Just ask the SteamGift gods if they'll set one up.
Comment has been collapsed.
^ this.
The subject of discussion is the very reason CV requirements can be set, I'm pretty sure?
Comment has been collapsed.
There are rules about multiple accounts so I'm not about to go making an alt to check, but quite recently I directed a friend with over $100 in library value to register here and they could not because it didn't count bundle games. If bundle games counted, it would be simple to buy a couple $1 bundles and get yourself over the $100 required.
Comment has been collapsed.
With all due respect, it's not $100 of non-bundled games, it's $100 worth of games overall minimum, whether from bundles or not.
Asking for $100 of non-bundled games would be impossible, even if people didn't buy those games from bundles, the rise of thousands of games that get bundled all the time (especially top stuff from Humble) would make their game library look like it all came from bundles anyway, it'd be very hard for people to keep meeting those requirements. And then you let the cat out of the bag with such a system, and the nouveau riche snobs start to demand that people who don't meet the requirements anymore get banned from the site, so let's just not go there.
Comment has been collapsed.
I suppose the "petition" there would be to donate towards the cost of running the site?
Comment has been collapsed.
so bugs bunny idles his games , or even a fakes it with idle-xyz, while he is cooking meth in his cave deserves to enter, but
duffy duck, that really plays much and loves to play, unfortunately he plays most times offline cause he has is a sailor, is the looser....ok in this case, duffy is always the looser it´s ok :-)
Comment has been collapsed.
So, you're saying you'd like better odds at winning so we should reduce the number of new users who take chances away from you? How about we make the minimum CV requirement to $30.01 for all giveaways instead? That would take care of the leechers problem, no?
Comment has been collapsed.
No. $30.01 doesn't mean someone is more generous.
Person A gives away 100 bundled games.
Person B gives away a $30 bundle game, and then gets cards from playing another bundle game. B sells those cards on the Steam market, buys a non-bundle DLC that's on sale for $0.25, and gives that away.
Person C gives away a $30 bundle game, and then gets $1.58 (the current value of £1) GMG credit for signing up for the PlayFire newsletter and linking their Steam account. C uses that credit to buy a (non-bundle) $5 game at 75% off, and gives that away.
Person D gives away four $25 games, two of which are bundled.
A is honestly giving. CV: $30.00
B is gaming the system. CV: $31.00
C is gaming the system. CV: $35.00
D is honestly giving. CV: $90.00
So, if you want to make a giveaway for people who give because they're generous, what do you set the minimum CV to? Ideally, you would only include A and D, but that isn't possible with the current CV system. Setting the limit to something higher, such as $60, excludes anyone trying to game the system, but you don't include A. $30 includes all four of them, even those who only gave to get CV. $30.01 is the worst option for these four, as it includes D, but also includes everyone who only gave to gain CV.
Comment has been collapsed.
And before anyone says "you're just saying that because your CV is only $30.00", note that this post shows that I know several ways to "cheat" to get past the $30 CV limit without having to spend anything, and have chosen not to.
I think the best option when making a giveaway for generous users is to make the minimum CV high enough to prevent selfish people who game the system to get slightly more than $30.00 CV from entering. $0.01 CV giveaways are also a good option to allow all contributors, and no CV giveaways are a good option to support those who might not be able to afford games to give away.
Comment has been collapsed.
The $30.01 was mostly a jab at the OP since he only gave bundled game. He wants a system that favors him so I "suggested" an idea that would leave him out. I've done all kind of giveaways: public, CV, private, groups... so I really don't think limiting to contributors only is the best way to go.
Comment has been collapsed.
Imho bundle games should still increase cv over $30. Let it be 10cents per each bundle game but still something that can make a diffrence.
Comment has been collapsed.
^ this
i mean, it's not like steamgifts is a giveaway site, it's more like a trade surprise for people with already a lot of games.
tbh i don't care, till now i won two dlc skins that were in a HB and a 2.99 game, not that i displease them, but i'm not at peasant level, it's good to win, but could have bought them myself (yeah, for 5 bucks, when i have the money for expensive hardware).
Raise requirement to 1000$ and set CV requirement for all giveaways to 100$, and call it "steam gifts lounge" or smth like that.
So you either make giveaways for people with already a lot of games, or lower requirements for people who have little money risking exploits.
Comment has been collapsed.
Maybe as a separate site, not to change this site to that. That'd be a really low-balling thing to do here.
Besides, wouldn't people also take the opposite approach? "This guy has $5,000 Steam value, he can buy his own games, why does he need giveaways! Let's ban him!" And whatever happened to charity? There are struggling gamers in this world who don't have much in games and don't have money to spend like a lot of hoity-toity people in this thread seem not to realize.
Comment has been collapsed.
Nobody needs them. Video games aren't a basic necessity like food and shelter. Just because I can afford to buy some games for myself doesn't mean I can buy everything I'd want.
Comment has been collapsed.
Why don't we just ask the creators of SteamGifts why they have the minimum library value at what it is at? the amount of limits on giveaways available? etc. etc.
Comment has been collapsed.
I think it's just high enough to show that you didn't create a fake account using freebies.
Comment has been collapsed.
And currently, I am still seing way too many alt accounts on the site.. So... Maybe it would be a good idea to increase it, indeed.
Comment has been collapsed.
To be honest I'd have a lot more interest in signing a petition to block people that have the resources to give away over $1000 in games from entering giveaways, instead of rewarding them with private club giveaways with 5 entries that they clearly don't need to be entering.
Comment has been collapsed.
100, 200, 1000... You all are wrong. Only these who killed Albus Dumbledore and ALWAYS loved Lily Potter can join giveaways.
Comment has been collapsed.
I know. Lets bring help to the kids that look richer and have more. And leave the poorest ones out to starve on the streets. good riddance.
I hope you're getting my point here.
You want an elite group, you should consider a giveaway group of your own. I don't like leechers as well, but that doesn't mean we should grow more strict.
Comment has been collapsed.
God no, you don't know hard it was for me to get to the minimum. I live in a place where your gainings per month are just 40 USD, so it was such a huge pain to get to 100$ in my account.
And I'm sure I'm not the only one here who had/have this problem
Comment has been collapsed.
maybe a requirement you can add to giveaways if the creator chooses to, is a CAPTCHA? The requirement is fine as it is, but I do believe there is a problem of alt. accounts and the like. A captcha might be annoying and might even make u lose a giveaway you showed up the last 5 seconds for, but if someone srsly didn't want every bot to join in a captcha might be what we're looking for.
I don't really care about leechers they can join giveaways that they are allowed in, it's only a problem when they complain about the system.
Comment has been collapsed.
441 Comments - Last post 37 minutes ago by xitau
215 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Atombomb2097
47,278 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by MeguminShiro
2,263 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by MeguminShiro
20 Comments - Last post 5 hours ago by Mayanaise
24 Comments - Last post 10 hours ago by wormmayhem
1,031 Comments - Last post 11 hours ago by MrTommy
725 Comments - Last post 4 minutes ago by winfryd
780 Comments - Last post 6 minutes ago by alexfirehouse
1,514 Comments - Last post 13 minutes ago by winfryd
6,551 Comments - Last post 33 minutes ago by Swordoffury
21 Comments - Last post 37 minutes ago by Gamy7
181 Comments - Last post 41 minutes ago by jesuswelcome
121 Comments - Last post 53 minutes ago by RVK250
was just thinking that sg is becoming too overcrowded (with leechers (sorry if you found it offensive))and maybe they should increase minimum library value from 100$ to about $200~$250?
Comment has been collapsed.