I wouldn't mind it. To be honest, I've only heard reasonable arguments for it, and none against it. It would just change my giveaway habits some, but other than that, not much would change. At the moment I just enter the giveaways I'm really interested in and when reaching 300 points, I look at my 2nd tier choice. If I could enter multiple times, I'd just expend all my points in less games, as would everyone else.
A side effect could be that less wanted games would actually end up being better entry choices, if too few people bothered spending their points on those.
Comment has been collapsed.
not a good idea, if some giveaway already have thousands of entrees all this would do is make the entry amount go into the tens of
thousands, imagine everybody entering multiple times, it would be so much harder to actually win something. some people will be so
thirsty to gain points, its almost expected to see an increase of fraudulent activities/giveaways.
Comment has been collapsed.
What you fail to understand is that 5000 entries wouldn't mean less chances of winning. If you used all your points, your chances would actually be higher. If, on the other hand, others used all their points, you'd have more chances of winning other giveaways.
Again, I'm not voting for it, I'm just saying it's a DIFFERENT method, with few arguments against it. The main argument seems to be "No, because it sux", which is not much of an argument, is it.
Comment has been collapsed.
It would probably change the spread of entries. The AAA giveaways would most likely have much more entries, but less popular games would have a quite little number of entries.
So basically people can choose and increase their chances at some selected giveaways or they could go on like before and enter a lot of giveaways with a lower chance.
Comment has been collapsed.
every giveaway has a crapload of entries, it wont change nothing.
in the current state right now all AAA title has a shit load of entrees, and shitty games like basketball manager 2010 has a shit load of entrees.
this whole idea wont change nothing. its not gonna stop people from entering giveaway or be any more selective about it.
Comment has been collapsed.
Of course it would change something. Either people don't change their entering behavior at all or they focus more. In the first case you can improve your chances in your prefered giveaways at the cost of the ones you don't want that much and hence not enter. In the second case it doesn't change it depends on your preferences.
Comment has been collapsed.
Hey, there's a 60 point giveaway. One guys been waiting and saving his 300 points to enter 5 times, while the other people who have spent their points, have to wait for their point pool to regenerate so they can enter in one giveaway 5 times for them to stand a chance.
Man, that really sounds fair doesn't it? Especially when you've got 1000+ entries. If all of them entered 5 times, thats actually 5000 entries.
Comment has been collapsed.
But at the same time, all those 1000 people that entered 5 times (and therefore spent all their points in that giveaway) did not enter the giveaways that the people with the empty pools entered. That means that they will have a lot higher chances of winning. You can look at it from both sides, since the end result of the points is zero.
Comment has been collapsed.
What I stated was the best possible choice, barring the length of the giveaway, the fact that if it is longer, there is a possibility of entering more times, granting more chances to win, unless there is a limit to the number of times entered.
One time entry for everyone is perfectly fine, allowing more entries per giveaway would likely make people feel pressured to enter into high point giveaways multiple times to give themselves a chance at winning. If they didn't win, they'd feel ripped off, having spent all of their points in one giveaway. Seeing that most giveaways have only one winner, you'd have about 999 pissed off people.
Personally, I just feel that allowing more entries wouldn't really change that much and would worse, even if it did allow more chances, it also allows for more wasteful point spending.
Comment has been collapsed.
Like I've replied higher up in these comments, I've already searched but only found three 10-month-old threads that didn't really give any solid reason why this would be a bad idea. The rest deal with multiple winnings.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well those points have to come from somewhere. That means that other giveaways would get less entries and give the people that enter higher chances.
Comment has been collapsed.
why all the higher % chances and stuff? of course not everybody can win at the same time, but just having
people gift stuff out isnt enough? there are already ways ways that have higher odds, people make special groups
or contributor giveaways. Most of the requirements require you to be a nice person or friendly or active, you dont need to be a super rich guy.
Comment has been collapsed.
Because people entering giveaways they don't really need in order to use up their points is not really the point of this site.
Comment has been collapsed.
How many times did I read this? How many FUCKING TIMES?! I'm sorry, but it's so annoying, is it so hard to search on the forum if there's been a thread about that before?
Comment has been collapsed.
I've already answered this question about three times in this thread. But I'll reply here too: I've already searched and could only find three threads from about 10 month ago that didn't really have any good arguments for why this would be a bad idea. Sorry if there are more threads that I couldn't find.
Comment has been collapsed.
I like the idea....I think we can get it to the Moderator!
Comment has been collapsed.
Skyrim appears. 24 hours to get your tickets cashed. 10 entry limit. Instead of 10k entries, there's 100k entries. None of the entrants have Skyrim. All you did is inflate the number. This achieves nothing.
Conversely, 10 people enter a contest. 1 person can afford 10 entries into it. That gives them a 10:1 unfair advantage.
No, there is nothing "fair" about this idea. You want it that badly? Go cut someone's lawn. Deliver some papers. Save some cash, buy the game.
Comment has been collapsed.
Let's say the game is one that I gave away. Poker Night at the Inventory. That's only 50 of your 300 points. They can still enter other giveaways. The other 9 participants (and I'm using ten for the sake of nice round numbers) don't have the points. This removes what is fair. That person who sat on that 300 can still participate in other giveaways. Unless you make up some additional rules of a cool-down cycle that prevents that ticket spammer from entering other giveaways, this still leaves them with 250 points.
And all of this still doesn't take into account all the extra coding that is going to need to be done for this idea. It doesn't account for the fact that you are given these points for free and have not invested anything but parking time to get the points.
Currently, 1 game 1 entrant. That's pretty fucking fair by definition. If you want a better chance to win, hang out in the chat and read the forums frequently. There's plenty of private contests that increase the chances of winning by virtue of decreasing the participants. Consequently, the proposed idea makes me wonder "Who are you to feel more entitled to a free prize than anyone else?"
On the surface and beneath the surface, this feels like a modified form of begging.
Comment has been collapsed.
when ever there is an official sweepstakes or prize or giveaway. its always a one entry per household or whatever crap, there are reasons for this to make it fair and so far from what i viewed in these comments is seems like a thinly veiled way of beggers to get more greedy.
Comment has been collapsed.
Even if... We can create single giveaway of multiple game copies, right? So if we had the option of entering giveaway multiple times we might end up winning more than 1 copy in it. To avoid this the site would need a code that would disable the ability to win the same game more than once. Seems good right? But... there are some fake and misinterpreted giveaways (giving one game under the name of other) and this type of "security" would disable people who won those "fake" giveaways from future entering the "real" ones. Seems like a problem to me (and since I saw people having "problems" with winning the same game twice and not knowing what to do with it.... well it might get little chaotic here)
Comment has been collapsed.
No. Even though I would love to enter each giveaway I give, this suggestion (which has been suggested before) is just unfair.
I've been at 300 points since January since I barely enter giveaways, and most of the games I want are about 10-20 dollars. That means I could have 30 entries in one giveaway. That's highly unfair.
Comment has been collapsed.
25 Comments - Last post 7 minutes ago by emsee
120 Comments - Last post 23 minutes ago by Amitte
1,232 Comments - Last post 26 minutes ago by Draconiano
47,118 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Fewithor
60 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Gamy7
56 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by Mantve
16,338 Comments - Last post 3 hours ago by Peiperissimus
22 Comments - Last post 27 seconds ago by Melusca
101 Comments - Last post 30 seconds ago by Mitsukuni
210 Comments - Last post 17 minutes ago by AlohaHawaii
16,296 Comments - Last post 20 minutes ago by Mishasama
31 Comments - Last post 22 minutes ago by Myrsan
40 Comments - Last post 29 minutes ago by reigifts
11 Comments - Last post 33 minutes ago by Marshdemallows
Since there are many users and most giveaways receive entries in the thousands, the chance of winning something is small. Combined with the fact that we get so many points constantly, I think many people are entering giveaways that they don't really need to enter, just so they can win something and because they don't want to waste the points by reaching the limit.
I would suggest that allowing multiple entries (perhaps with a maximum of 3 or 5 or even 10 depending on what's reasonable) for the same giveaway would solve this problem. This way, if you really want a game, you'll spend more on it and have a slightly higher chance of winning. Comparing it to the lottery, it's just like buying more than one ticket to increase your chances.
What do you think?
Edit
Comment has been collapsed.