Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
This topic has been locked 
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
Friend slots are tied to the levels, so if you want more friend slots, simply raise your level.
The meta-game is part of the Steam economy. If you don't like it, you obviously don't have to participate. But you also don't have to expect to get anything, as you aren't owed anything.
Besides, no matter where the line is drawn, people will always want more.
However, I see your point. You deserve to have (x) friends. I am in-between, however more so leaning towards giving levelling incentive. I'm sorry.
I only choose this approach because there's a lot of amazing purpose in showing yourself to be outside of others that is just overall a fun ability. Whether it's buying the cards in the market, getting them in games, etc. The cards are there because they opt to level you up.
However, again, you deserve (x) friends, you shouldn't be limited to (x) friends just because you don't have the money to buy said cards perhaps, or don't have the time to earn them which takes months as they are very randomly rewarded at very spiratic generally rare rates. Ergo I don't think anyone should be jumping you here, i'm just saying I agree with them because the leveling system does have good purpose.
+1, just for this to be considered and because your approach is exactly how I would approach this issue. In increasing (x) friends on level 0, they can increase (x) friends on level 1-etc., there shouldn't be much limit at all in the higher to highest level. However, I am unexperienced on the benefits of highest level quite yet. It should still be considered appropriately.
The metagaming aspect is meant to stimulate the steam economy, and you get little perks as a reward. The logic is that adding directly to the steam economy by making substantial purchases ought to carry some of the same rewards. Nothing far fetched or odd about it at all.
That's generally true of anything, doesn't mean any placement of the line is as good as any other.
Most people seem able to roughly remember 300 or so people if they've been steadily adding and playing with them over a period of years. It becomes a constraining limit after some time, as some have noticed, which is partially why I emphasize how long someone's been on the platform.
I think most of them could reasonably argue that 300 was a bit painful when they had to remove people they know. I don' think they could make the same argument with 600 or 1000 people, as most people just don't have the memory capacity to make that as reasonable a request.
I don't really mind the metagaming as such, and your point that it helps people who can't afford to buy tons of games etc. is a good one. I just feel it's a bit uneven that you can't get at least some of the benefits (not necessarily shiny avatar frames and the like) for giving steam a fair amount of extra cash.
I'm pretty sure the cost of it in terms of bandwidth and computing/storage resources would be insignificant compared to their overall expenditure if something like this were aimed at users with a given number of purchases (mo money in da bank to pay for it all).
It seems you missed both the point of the suggestion - increase friends list without requiring 'level up', and didn't quite read what I wrote.
Changing things is literally what this section of the forums is for. Literally.
You seem a bit confused about the nature and intent of this whole post.
Again, you're completely missing the point. This is a suggestion, comments are meant to discuss it, bring in some arguments for or against.
All you're doing is making statements about what's already implied.
"You need to learn to level up" - I don't.
It was implied that I know how this works, and thought it's a good idea to incentivise people to contribute economically beyond mere community participation, while reaping some of the same benefits.
"I'm not the one who wants to change things" - Correct. That's me, and some others for that matter. Pointing this out is completely useless. It's not an argument, just spiteful bouncing of a dull fact everyone can see plainly.
"you agree with yourself." Neither true nor false, just a pointless thing to say when this is supposed to be a discussion. If I were the only one who posted in favor of it, that still wouldn't make me the only one who agreed with it, just the only one to voice it, though if you scroll up and actually read the thread before replying, you'll see that's not entirely true either.
" The problem is that you are one person and yet the majority must agree." No. You're writing as if this is a ballot vote, not a discussion. Nobody has to majority agree to anything. It's a discussion.
You should try coming up with something constructive to say instead of these run-of-the-mill shoot-down-the-idea posts.
Needing to learn it implies not knowing how. You're missing this basic tidbit once again, so I'll just ignore further comments from you since you're clearly not paying attention.
You don't even have to buy any games to level up an account. You can just buy super cheap sets of cards from any game to craft badges.
But if you want more friend slots, Valve expects you to earn them.
I've only visited the forums a little in the dozen years I've been a Steam user, and unfortunately "run-of-the-mill-shoot-down-the-idea posts" seem to be the standard. Without a way to +1 posts all users are left is to make similar requests endlessly. And just because an idea has been suggested without adoption by Steam in the past doesn't disqualify the discussion aspect that the forums are built upon. People seem to think that reposts are an indicator of ignorance. That they're an annoyance. And find some gratification in snowballing their disapprovals together. I say keep up the good fight. Nothing great ever got accomplished by someone whose first instinct is to think change is impossible.
Except in this case Valve has created a way to increase the number of people you can have on your friends list and apparently has no intention of changing it. Just because the OP is acting entitled and doesn't want to do things the way everyone else has to, isn't a reason to change it. He has to do it the same way everyone else has too, by leveling up his account.
This. My sentiment exactly, and precisely why I so rarely use these forums. It's chock full of closet valve fanboys and people all trigger happy to shoot down any idea, plus a heap of people who 'just post to post'. Re-posting an idea is somehow inherently bad, but responding to an old thread is necro'ing, and also bad.
Almost every post here just proves it, and more, abundantly.
You're just re-proving so many previous points about why these forums are so woefully unconstructive. There's nothing 'entitled' about suggesting that "pouring a hundred dollars into valve's pocket over an extended use period ought to carry the same benefits as the economic boost to their platform some social participation and metagaming gets you". Pretty logical in fact, but of course, instead of properly looking at the text paragraphs preceeding this and considering the logic, you can just repeat the same info that's already been posted here a handful of times over already, add a few adjectives, and join the snowball. Basically just underlining what's in the post you responded to.