It's was a great idea by Valve and it has proven very effective in the prevention of bot/phisher growth. It's just a shame that the limitation is such a generous amount.

Steam accounts are free but that doesn't mean users are entitled to such features and if they cannot afford to commit a measly $5 USD to their account to access such things; then they really shouldn't be gaming on PC. If people have access to the internet, a computer; there are numerous ways of addding funds to their Steam wallet or purchasing games and they should be thankful that the limitation hasn't been raised to $10+.

If people cannot add funds for whatever reason; then they can still access their account and play games but they just aren't entitled to have free reign on the balance that phisher prevention is far more important to the service than upsetting a minority.

There are infinitely more bots than ppl who cannot afford $5 to unlock their account... So limiting new accounts does much more good than bad.

Not talking about the limited account system in general(while I'm not much a fan of that I kinda understand it), but only about how gifting no longer works.
Also seriously, how many people have to be that stupid to get fooled by those fakes for valve to add this thing, same with the web filter, sure makes sense, but if there was any way to disable those, I'd do that the next second.
People should still be able to add friends or join group chats if they are legit and there should be a better alternative to this system.

Go to Capital One 360 and have mommy or daddy open a prepaid debit money card for you. Then all you have to do is register that card with steam under you name. That's what I do for my kids and then they can buy what they want from allowance and chores and I don't have to worry about my card being tied to thier account or them over spending. It's perfect for kids

引用自 r543：

Not talking about the limited account system in general(while I'm not much a fan of that I kinda understand it), but only about how gifting no longer works..

The rationale was to make it fair to everyone. One of the primary reasons to disallow keys as a method to unlock your account was due to many just buying up cheap bundles, thus circumventing the whole $5 invested idea. Steam gifts as well, such that each account has some sort of tangible, trackable payment method to verify identity.

引用自 r543：

Not talking about the limited account system in general(while I'm not much a fan of that I kinda understand it), but only about how gifting no longer works.
Also seriously, how many people have to be that stupid to get fooled by those fakes for valve to add this thing, same with the web filter, sure makes sense, but if there was any way to disable those, I'd do that the next second.
People should still be able to add friends or join group chats if they are legit and there should be a better alternative to this system.

77,000 users a month have their accounts compromised through hijackings to this day - this is with the additional protections in place on Steam. If bots and phishers were still prominent on here through a lack of limited functionality; that number would be more like 277,000.

Valve have plugged the gaps as best they can on Steam and it has been a monumental success. Sadly there is still too many users who become compromised through 3rd party sites and this is still proving a massive issue but at least Steam is cleaner. With the new authenticator security layers and trade holds; the security is ony going to steepen in time. There is no other way really.

引用自 tmwfte：

引用自 r543：

Not talking about the limited account system in general(while I'm not much a fan of that I kinda understand it), but only about how gifting no longer works..

The rationale was to make it fair to everyone. One of the primary reasons to disallow keys as a method to unlock your account was due to many just buying up cheap bundles, thus circumventing the whole $5 invested idea. Steam gifts as well, such that each account has some sort of tangible, trackable payment method to verify identity.

Yeah, there was a time when you could just buy humble bundle for literally 0.01$ and get a few games that are probabably worth 5$... Then they added a 1$ minimum for these bundles but it's still dirt cheap.

引用自 J4MESOX4D：

There is no other way really.

Steam needs a good old-fashioned analog version like GOG's GOGbook. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pc6zIAq2J7A

引用自 J4MESOX4D：

引用自 r543：

Not talking about the limited account system in general(while I'm not much a fan of that I kinda understand it), but only about how gifting no longer works.
Also seriously, how many people have to be that stupid to get fooled by those fakes for valve to add this thing, same with the web filter, sure makes sense, but if there was any way to disable those, I'd do that the next second.
People should still be able to add friends or join group chats if they are legit and there should be a better alternative to this system.

77,000 users a month have their accounts compromised through hijackings to this day - this is with the additional protections in place on Steam. If bots and phishers were still prominent on here through a lack of limited functionality; that number would be more like 277,000.

Valve have plugged the gaps as best they can on Steam and it has been a monumental success. Sadly there is still too many users who become compromised through 3rd party sites and this is still proving a massive issue but at least Steam is cleaner. With the new authenticator security layers and trade holds; the security is ony going to steepen in time. There is no other way really.

77.000 is usually less than 1% of the total online users at any given time (currently over 9.2 millions). While I am glad I no longer get those 1000+ invites every day, the solution to this problem could have been much much simpler and less damaging to the real new users with good intentions. It's never about whether I can or cannot afford the $5 - bots would simply use Russian Kiosks to premium TF2 for 50 cents and voila..

The new trading holds (aka escrow) was also installed because of that less than 1% of users who will, no doubt, continue to be scammed and hijacked, ignoring the rest 99% entirely.

Lately Valve are becoming notorious for going around problems, instead of fixing them.

引用自 SPAAACE!：

引用自 J4MESOX4D：

77,000 users a month have their accounts compromised through hijackings to this day - this is with the additional protections in place on Steam. If bots and phishers were still prominent on here through a lack of limited functionality; that number would be more like 277,000.

Valve have plugged the gaps as best they can on Steam and it has been a monumental success. Sadly there is still too many users who become compromised through 3rd party sites and this is still proving a massive issue but at least Steam is cleaner. With the new authenticator security layers and trade holds; the security is ony going to steepen in time. There is no other way really.

77.000 is usually less than 1% of the total online users at any given time (currently over 9.2 millions). While I am glad I no longer get those 1000+ invites every day, the solution to this problem could have been much much simpler and less damaging to the real new users with good intentions. It's never about whether I can or cannot afford the $5 - bots would simply use Russian Kiosks to premium TF2 for 50 cents and voila..

The new trading holds (aka escrow) was also installed because of that less than 1% of users who will, no doubt, continue to be scammed and hijacked, ignoring the rest 99% entirely.

Lately Valve are becoming notorious for going around problems, instead of fixing them.

77,000 is far too large especially considering the size of Steam Support regardless of the percentage ratio in relation to the total active community. That's nearly a million accounts a year as of now and Support have to then clean up the mess that users got themselves into by becoming compromised on sites outside of Steam. The fact that link masking and the significant lack of bot activity now has proved the limited account feature has been a huge success with a non-existent backlash. Steam cannot assess 'good user intentions' and I haven't seen a person provide one credible alternative that could have the same impact without the user having to commit a measly $5 to their account. Valve and Steam is also a business so if they can enforce and entice a user to spend money on their free non-entitled account; it's a good decision but it is primarily for the sake of phishing-prevention and there is less justification for cheapskates or non-committed users when compared to stringent security.

The Escrow saga is irritating but once again; it's been born out of neccessity because of the existing phishing (outside of Steam) we see now. It protects users inventory and account integrity and lessens the headache Support have currently now for a more swifter service. I'm willing to bet that 90%+ of compromised users are low level, one-stop shopper users with no common sense of basic online security, that don't give anything back who are dragging the infrastructure down and they should be blamed on all counts. Limited users can still accept friend requests but for other features such as the market; an established financial trace is a must.

引用自 J4MESOX4D：

It's was a great idea by Valve and it has proven very effective in the prevention of bot/phisher growth. It's just a shame that the limitation is such a generous amount.

Steam accounts are free but that doesn't mean users are entitled to such features and if they cannot afford to commit a measly $5 USD to their account to access such things; then they really shouldn't be gaming on PC. If people have access to the internet, a computer; there are numerous ways of addding funds to their Steam wallet or purchasing games and they should be thankful that the limitation hasn't been raised to $10+.

If people cannot add funds for whatever reason; then they can still access their account and play games but they just aren't entitled to have free reign on the balance that phisher prevention is far more important to the service than upsetting a minority.

There's some people out there using used laptops in family Wifi. Or parents that don't enjoy the idea of spending on games. I feel like this is really dumb, and there are much cheaper ways to achieve the same effect (mandatory 2FA, maybe linking a phone, playing for ### hours,)

引用自 EvolvedGodzilla：

引用自 J4MESOX4D：

It's was a great idea by Valve and it has proven very effective in the prevention of bot/phisher growth. It's just a shame that the limitation is such a generous amount.

Steam accounts are free but that doesn't mean users are entitled to such features and if they cannot afford to commit a measly $5 USD to their account to access such things; then they really shouldn't be gaming on PC. If people have access to the internet, a computer; there are numerous ways of addding funds to their Steam wallet or purchasing games and they should be thankful that the limitation hasn't been raised to $10+.

If people cannot add funds for whatever reason; then they can still access their account and play games but they just aren't entitled to have free reign on the balance that phisher prevention is far more important to the service than upsetting a minority.

There's some people out there using used laptops in family Wifi. Or parents that don't enjoy the idea of spending on games. I feel like this is really dumb, and there are much cheaper ways to achieve the same effect (mandatory 2FA, maybe linking a phone, playing for ### hours,)

Thread is a decade old. Really no need to necro it. Only thing this really accomplished is getting it locked whenever a moderator sees it.

引用自 EvolvedGodzilla：

引用自 J4MESOX4D：

It's was a great idea by Valve and it has proven very effective in the prevention of bot/phisher growth. It's just a shame that the limitation is such a generous amount.

Steam accounts are free but that doesn't mean users are entitled to such features and if they cannot afford to commit a measly $5 USD to their account to access such things; then they really shouldn't be gaming on PC. If people have access to the internet, a computer; there are numerous ways of addding funds to their Steam wallet or purchasing games and they should be thankful that the limitation hasn't been raised to $10+.

If people cannot add funds for whatever reason; then they can still access their account and play games but they just aren't entitled to have free reign on the balance that phisher prevention is far more important to the service than upsetting a minority.

There's some people out there using used laptops in family Wifi. Or parents that don't enjoy the idea of spending on games. I feel like this is really dumb, and there are much cheaper ways to achieve the same effect (mandatory 2FA, maybe linking a phone, playing for ### hours,)

It's not meant to fit everyone's scenario. The only goal was to make it more difficult for malicious actors from negatively affecting the community. It's not about you.

This thread was quite old before the recent post, so we're locking it to prevent confusion.