A clear message on the create giveaway page which sums up the important aspects of giveaway creation with a link to a full and clear FAQ.
Really, I agree with some other comments, but this is hands down what I feel this site needs the most. I've been here for over a year, and it was always clear it's hard to find the rules, that people easily miss them, and that therefore they get upset or do things against the rules, but no attempt has been made to make things clearer. (Although I've read that the FAQ is being rewritten, which would be a start.)
Comment has been collapsed.
some of my ideas...i know it is not just one...oh well
Comment has been collapsed.
These are really good ideas, but I don't agree with the last point. I think it's rude to enter for a game you don't even want just to trade it later and get something else. The giveaway creator probably wants to give it to someone who would like to play this particular game.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, as I completely agree with you that is awful to enter giveaways just to re-gift them here for contr. value or for selling/trading in steamtrades I also like to enter giveaways and gift the games to friends (not via steamgifts of course).
Comment has been collapsed.
I have occasionally wanted to enter a giveaway for a friend, but obviously couldn't. The problem is that using this site to sell wins is pretty much the shittiest thing a person can do. Requiring account activation is the only way I see being able to prevent that.
Comment has been collapsed.
I LOVE this:
If it's a situation where the creator did nothing wrong but the receiver is the one incorrectly marking not received, then those get sorted by support.
Comment has been collapsed.
The ability to filter games like the addons, that feature is really the only reason i use the addons at all.
Comment has been collapsed.
Remove bundle games. It's insane that this thing exist. People that contribute games, which are essentially 96% off, are considered leechers and get hated by the entire steamgifts "upper class", yet if you contribute games that are 90% off on steam, there is no problem at all. It's also not based on the % that the game is off, because there were a couple of games that were 90% off on steam and were not considered bundle games, yet the crazy machines bundle, that had a total value of 50$ and cost 5$ to get everything, was essentially 90% off yet you can't get contributor value for that.
I consider this system elitist and I hope that some people will agree with me so we can get rid of it. It's fair that you don't get full contributor value for bundles with 200$ value but you only paid 6$ for it, but the 30$ limit so that people can put up a "leechblock" at 30.01$ is just straight up a kick in the balls to the people that don't have free access to credit cards and money.
I propose that people get full contributor value for every game and only limit games that you can easily get for free (Dota 2, The Ship, Metro 2033,...). But still, if you would just cut contributor value for bundle games in half for a period of time after the bundle went on sale, I'd be happy. This elitist feeling that came with the contributor system would completely dissapear. You would still be able to thank the big contributors, but leechblocks would dissapear completely and the joy of free games could be spread more equally.
Also, I wrote this thing up quickly, so if you're confused about certain parts or I worded myself poorly, feel free to ask for a better explanation.
Comment has been collapsed.
Sounds good to me! Good to see someone actually agrees with me
Comment has been collapsed.
People were accusing others of being elitist way before contribution system was introduced. At that point it was aimed at private giveaway groups and their members. I predict that if this site allows people to limit entries somehow (group/private/contribution/etc.), there will be always someone blaming others for being elitist. Now each one can make their own judgement whether that possibility is good and what would follow if it would be removed.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't consider private groups elitist. Private groups are usually a bunch of friends together, and if you want to make a giveaway specifically for your friends, I can't see something wrong with it. It's true, now everyone can make their own judgement, but it's turning this site into something it isn't suppose to be.
In my eyes, this site is created to give people who can't access games the chance to get them and the contributor giveaways are a way to thank people who gift games. With leechblock, it feels more like a site where you have to give something to get something, this site is becoming a luck based steamtrades instead of a site where people can share the joy they receive from games.
Comment has been collapsed.
To my knowledge, there are plenty of giveaways without contribution limit. Also, quite many of them seem to be of very low value e.g. 0.01$ or 1$. There have been many AAA titles given without contribution limit in public side. I can understand your view of pay-to-win scenario but in my opinion it is not in place.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's way too common for it to be ignored. I've solved a ton of puzzle giveaways to end up with a giveaway which I can't enter because of the leechblock. There are a ton of public giveaways with 30.01$ contrib value and on the forums I see it even more often. To you it might not seem like an issue, but I encounter it so often that I want to change the contributor value system.
I don't have a problem with giveaways having a certain contributor value and I'm more than happy with all the giveaways that are open for everyone, but I feel that the contributor system in place now is just to filter out the "leechers" instead of thank the contributors. The system now creates the idea that bundle games aren't true contributions and only for people who want to farm contributor value. It doesn't encourage giving away "higher quality" games, it discourages giving away indie games which often are amazing in their own rights. I absolutely love VVVVVV and I have considered sharing the joy, but why the hell should I give it away if I still get considered a "leecher" and get scuffed at?
Comment has been collapsed.
I agree on it that current system has its drawbacks. Another system would have different drawbacks and I seriously doubt that any single option wouldn't be met with negative critique. It is a shame to see good games deemed as worthless as they have been in a bundle - this problem is not limited only to SG by the way.
It is usually easy to check if puzzle giveaway has contribution requirement if creator has not specified it. In my opinion, contribution limit on puzzles is not required as the point of puzzle is to solve and giveaway comes as an extra bonus but creators' have freedom to do as they please.
Comment has been collapsed.
On the puzzle thing, I've learned to check but sometimes I still forget. I also think puzzle giveaways shouldn't require any contributor value, or any other private giveaway for that matter. You decide who you give it out to, so filtering the people that people choose seems a bit silly to me.
As for the system, I would switch the current system with a system where games that go on sale for over 80% (or another percentage) get only 50% or 25% of the contributor value. This way you can't exclude bundle-only contributors, but people that buy new games (which usually aren't in bundles or on extreme sales) get more contributor value.
Also, I hope they find a solution to the lowering of the contributor value after a change in the steam pricing, because I can see this becoming very annoying to people. One day you have 100$ contributor value, and the next you have 60$. Seems unfair and extremely annoying, so I hope they find a solution for that.
Comment has been collapsed.
I would consider any sale system watchdog to be impractical. Again, contribution value does not mean the same as how much person has paid for those games.
Value of older games gets lower and it is good to site's economy. It encourages users to make new giveaways to keep their contribution up and also somewhat diminishes contribution growth overall. How can it be unfair if it affects everyone equally?
Comment has been collapsed.
In my mind it discourages people to make giveaways. They might get 60$ of value early on, but they know that it really means they only get 20$ in a couple of months. People who buy games when they're new get punished, while people who buy old games on the cheap don't lose any contributor value. It feels unfair from the site towards the users, "tricking" new users into contributing high priced games, but they only get lower contributor value.
Comment has been collapsed.
I am in general favor of more options to giveaway creators. I somehow foresee that this option, like others, cause more uproar and crying as people define it unfair for some and favoring those that hang on the site around the clock.
Comment has been collapsed.
I think it may be a good idea. It's not a mandatory thing. The gifter could choose the max entry amount for any single giveaway, but no one would have to set an entry at all. It's only about as cheap as adding contributor value requirements.
Comment has been collapsed.
And no one complains about it ever. But as I said, having more options is better in my opinion.
Comment has been collapsed.
No retroactive changes to game value of gifts. That's just plain wrong.
Comment has been collapsed.
For bundle games it's retro to when the bundle started. If you gave it away before, you're fine. If you're talking about Steam reducing prices and thus your amount drops, that's because this site runs off of and pulls from Steam's database. There's nothing (at least at this time without major coding I'm sure) that can be done about that :/
Comment has been collapsed.
That's a shame, then. Quite annoying to see my contributor value drop for no real reason (abuse, farming or such, not just by simply Valve cutting prices).
Also, thank you for the clarification.
Comment has been collapsed.
+1
Why pay 50 dollars for a new game if it's only going to be worth 20 in a few months? A workaround needs to be found.
Comment has been collapsed.
I see this as regular inflation and it is good for site's economy in general as people, who consider contribution value to be important, have to make new giveaways to stay in top. Few suffer for many to prosper.
Comment has been collapsed.
I would adjust the contributor system slightly, I believe the value of the game should remain the same as on the day it was given, not decrease over time with steam prices as in the current system. The price you paid to give the game away didn't change, so why should your contributor value?
Comment has been collapsed.
Improve the FAQ and makes it more visible in home page, as well as improve the communication system for notifying rules changes, news, and so...
Comment has been collapsed.
I have nothing against the developers creating giveaways themselves and getting contributors for that, I actually encourage that.
But people here mostly talk about other members who ask developers for keys, create 'developer-sponsored' giveaways and boost their contributors that way.
Comment has been collapsed.
Change Contributor system to give bundle games $2 contribution for each or $2x x number of games to whole bundle.
Add a button that adds thanks to thegiveaway without clutering the comments section and make writing only "Thanks" in commands a banable offense.
Add a little info box for games that are currently in a bundle directly linking to its site.
Increase the Max points your account can hold by 5 or 10 for each year after your first giveaway.
Comment has been collapsed.
What about placing a CAPCHA for comments? This would stop many THANKS bots, and cut way down on the human THANKS bots also.
Comment has been collapsed.
Giveaway only can be entered by people who have the game in their top 10 wishlist. It's kinda sad when the game just went to another person's backlog.
Comment has been collapsed.
Nothing stops a person from rearranging their wishlist to match giveaways.
Comment has been collapsed.
My attempt to make giveaway exclusive for those who wishlisted the game. Some people got into the giveaway by brute force, some cleverly search for the right description on Steam store. It was quite interesting. I think I will do another with 1-5 hour wishlist giveaway. 11 hours is just too much.
Comment has been collapsed.
+1 This is a good idea.
Contributor sets X: "Game is in the top X of entrant's wishlist at point of entry"
Giveaway is created and thumbnail/title/points value is kept secret.
Entrant clicks "Enter Giveaway", if the game is in the top X of their wishlist, they're entered and they can see what the game is.
If it's not, they're excluded from entering that giveaway permanently.
Comment has been collapsed.
52 Comments - Last post 32 minutes ago by Sibereren
326 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by SirChrisSwan
36 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by ctype
24 Comments - Last post 4 hours ago by OneManArmyStar
165 Comments - Last post 4 hours ago by ngrazer
40 Comments - Last post 10 hours ago by xMisiu
812 Comments - Last post 12 hours ago by PicoMan
2,484 Comments - Last post 3 minutes ago by RVK250
203 Comments - Last post 4 minutes ago by CheMan39
74 Comments - Last post 8 minutes ago by boloxer
8 Comments - Last post 8 minutes ago by Kappaking
70 Comments - Last post 10 minutes ago by Mhol1071
230 Comments - Last post 11 minutes ago by igel2005
727 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Saikania
Something specific, not vague like "fix the contributor system", or jokes like "make me win every giveaway", or "get rid of leechers". Maybe more than anything you want to see giveaway replies on the "Replies" screen, or maybe you just want the background to be orange.
What would you change right now? Feel free to +1 if someone said your thing.
Comment has been collapsed.