If you refund an indy game that you completed, you're a sociopath and there's no helping you. There isn't a structural system that's going to prevent that, some people are complete human garbage
post
If you're planning to refund a game. Just pirate it
You have to trust the source where you download to pirate it.
Just gotta find a decent private tracker and keep your ratio good.
I mean I have a hard time trusting hacked and pirated games, that they do not contain anything harmful. It's been a long time since I pirated a PC game. We talk about Windows XP from my experience here. xD
You can trust cracked games if you do your research on release groups etc. As I Arch user, I'm more afraid of AUR than most cracked games tbh. Not at all worried if the game is from a trusted release with a good track record. Some of these groups as been at it for decades now.
I don't know how you can compare the AUR to this situation. With the AUR, if you know what you are doing, then you can check the script yourself. You don't have to trust in good faith.
The people who legitimately do this are the ones who make the rest of the gamers look bad.
If you bought a game, especially for $3, played it from start to finish over the course of an hour and a half, and then bragged about it when you refunded it. You fully deserve to have your refund capability disabled.
The thing is, though, I don't really know a way that this can be implemented without allowing publishers to game the system. I do personally think that Two Hours is a little generous for the overall story because I will generally know whether or not I'm going to like a game within 35 minutes of playing.
I think a good alternative to it is have your refund window be based off of the current sale price of the game.
So for a game that's less than five bucks, you would only have somewhere between 30 minutes to an hour of a refund window.
Then for your typical indie window, which would be like fifteen to thirty dollars, you have an hour to hour and a half then your AAA title pricing of ~60, you have two or three hours.
I can understand refunding a game if it's broken on your system or just trash, but it feels real sleazy to me to spend money on a game, play it to completion, and then refund it anyway.
It largely depends on the type of game. There's are plenty of games I've played where you're still in the tutorial after 2 hours. Hell, I don't think I knew if I liked EU4 until I was like 50+ hours in.
You don't need 2 hours to figure out if you like Super Meat Boy though. You'll know in less than an hour. Probably less than that.
For those who wonder how you could play a game for 50+ hours and not know if you like it; it's a grand strategy game with lots of functionally. A full game can easily be 50+ hours depending on how fast you let the game run, and your first game is definitely going to have a lot of pausing trying to figure out various functionality. First game is or two is just figuring out the basic gameplay.
You'd be wrong. Though you could say I didn't hate it at least. But I certainly hadn't made up my mind yet.
I played the first game with a friend. Which is largely why I even finished it. It's pretty overwhelming because you're left to figure out a lot on your own. Second game I played on my own. After that is when I knew I liked it, or at least toward the end of that second game.
I can't think of anything other than grand strategy games that I've been that indecisive over. Everything else has been within like 3 hours. Some barely even 20 minutes.
I agree. We're not discussing "liking a game" in the context of whether or not it deserves 5 stars; we're talking about whether or not you're going to demand a refund. There's clothing I regretted buying after 50 hours of wear, but by that point I've taken off the tag and it's gone through a laundry cycle. I'd be considered trashy to take that back to the store even if within the return window.
Maybe have a new rule for shorter games, like if its reasonable to complete the game normally in under 5 hours then the 2 hour window should be 1 hour or even 30 minutes. Idk how games are submitted but it should be an option at that time on how long the game is or a question about if its over or under x hours long so they know how to treat the game for this policy.
That’s where the abuse comes in, because how can you be sure a developer won’t make a short game and list it as 20hrs to complete?
A dev that is abusing the system is going to be delisted by Valve real quick, methinks.
I mean databases like howlongtobeat.com do exist. Steam could also come up with their own numbers by looking at the average playtime when players get the achievement for winning the game.
Issue with both is, the game needs to already have been released and beaten a few times.
Enough rules, enough automations, I say, just make steam actually hire some real customer service humans. What? They can't afford it?
This would only work if the game participates in regional pricing, otherwise you're fucking over most people who don't deal in USD. $15 to you is not just $15 to everyone else.
I don't see how this would be too much of an issue. If it's that way in one region, then it would be unilateral all across all regions. Price wouldn't really matter at that point as long as you're using the same guideline
I don’t see how this would be too much of an issue.
So not only are people paying more than you're paying because the value of the dollar is higher in their country, the money they're paying is now at a higher risk because they have a smaller refund window.
You would be essentially taking an existing issue and making it worse.
you are forgetting though that a 5$ USD game isn't going to magically becomes < 5$ USD though. if its using the same framework even if the game is only worth 2$ native, its still 5$ USD and therefore would be the same. Regional pricing doesn't matter in the scenario.
you are forgetting though that a 5$ USD game isn’t going to magically becomes < 5$ USD though.
I am not, and that was not the point. The point is if you're paying $5, and someone in a non-USD region is paying $5, they're taking a bigger risk than you if the game ends up sucking because $5 is worth more in their region.
Lowering the refund period for everyone without regional pricing means people in underprivileged regions are taking on more risk than you are; ergo, you're punishing them for being underprivileged, and making a bad situation worse.
you are misunderstanding. I'm saying pick a region for the guideline, if its $5 on that region the game has that refund period. Then apply regional pricing. There's zero reason to apply a framework for every region that's more work then needed. the lower regional price would have the same refund period as the standard pricing as its following the same framework. The fact its lower price does not matter, as regions do not matter.
Then the only time it would need to be region based, is if they sold a region specific SKU such as some Japanese or Australian releases instead of having to go in and select refund periods for every period in every region. That's way more work than is needed.
edit: i misread a core part of this chain, oops
you are misunderstanding.
I don't think I am. The issue is not that your system won't work with regional pricing, it's that it will not work without it.
I’m saying pick a region for the guideline, if its $5 on that region the game has that refund period. Then apply regional pricing.
Yeah, that's the issue. Some games do not opt into regional pricing, so the price never gets lowered, which means they will be paying $5 and have, for example, only 1 hour to refund the game, just like someone in the US. Their having to pay $5 is already an issue, and now they have even less time to refund it if it sucks.
There’s zero reason to apply a framework for every region that’s more work then needed.
I never adovacted for this. You can tie the refund period to money paid, no problem. You do not need a different refund period framework for every region, and I don't understand why you think I'm pushing for this to begin with. It's fine as long as you enforce regional pricing for everyone, which's not something Steam will do.
At this point, I'm not sure where our disconnect is so I'm not really sure how else to clarify, im not sure how you read what I sent and somehow got that it has any attachment to regional pricing. The framework I'm talking about would not require regional pricing at all because the only price it cares about is what the price is in the chosen region.
The system I'm advocating would work with or without regional pricing because the region's price doesn't matter.
As an example, say their chosen region is the US and they decide that $5 means it's a 30 minute return.
But then they have another region that is two dollars.
It doesn't matter that it's $2 in that region because the region that is used for the metric is $5.
So the $2 game that is regional pricing would have the return policy of the $5 game because the region that they use for the calculations has it at $5. As a further example, the inverse would be true as well. If it was $10 in the associated region, since the framework region is $5, the $10 game would have the $5 policy
I'm not sure why it needs to be so complicated to have specific return policies for every single region. At the end of the day the value in the framework region is isolated from the framework and no changes to its price would change its return policy as it doesn't matter
I’m not sure why it needs to be so complicated to have specific return policies for every single region.
I am not advocating for this. I do not understand why you think I'm advocating for this when I never brought it up.
Please re-read my last comment.
ah sorry, yea I reread it when I got on my pc and I can see where I misunderstood your position,
as for where I got the concept from:
This would only work if the game participates in regional pricing, otherwise you’re fucking over most people who don’t deal in USD. $15 to you is not just $15 to everyone else.
and then
I don’t think I am. The issue is not that your system won’t work with regional pricing, it’s that it will not work without it.
since my post was about having it be based off a policy on pricing based off the current price, I took that as a message stating that it requires regional pricing to work. So I jumped the gun a little and thought you meant that you were advocating that for it to work, they would need regional pricing on everything as such would require regional based refunds for those areas, but I can see where I got overzealous on that so I apologize.
My opinion is still the same on it though, I think it would be better to implement that system than to not, even if the dev doesn't participate in regional pricing at all, worst case scenario is it's a static price with a static return based off the only price available and the buyer would know that going into it. I could see how it could negativly impact the buyer like you said but, if the seller is already not participating with regional pricing, there isn't much else that can be done to fix that. Maybe keep the current system if the game is is bought in a region and not with regional pricing? but I don't think that would really work either as it could just enable the abuse in those regions still. It can definitely work without regional pricing but, preferably if the dev wants to have sales, they really should enable it.
Also as an addition because I didn't mention it, I used USD as an example because it's what is generally used for an example, obviously said framework could be any region as long as it's consistant across every game so it's not confusing. Honestly steam could likely even supply a exchange tool to auto do the exchange across all denominations. They do that already for payouts/purchases
Oh I get you there.
I played The Witcher 3 for over a hundred hours and didn’t realize I didn’t like it until I went to have a threesome with Triss and Yennefer and instead got left with blue balls.
I would have returned that game right then and there if I could have.
Some gaming consumers are just easily directed cattle for rage stampedes about whatever. No time for comprehension, just get the pitch forks and go burn some shit down!
Similar theme but different story was that guy who distributes a VR "mod" for various games, including Cyberpunk 2077. The nuanced part is a big chunk of it is in proprietary libraries that are independent of the games it provides VR support for. Just look at what PrayDog had to do to get VR support for just Unreal games https://github.com/praydog/UEVR/tree/master and that other guy has made a toolset that works with multiple engines. Charging at most a one time patreon fee for an unlocked copy doesn't sound that greedy.
Another one was the more muted whining that Valheim's Iron Gate has cheated everyone by doing "the bare minimum" to be Early Access and are abandoning an unfinished game with Valheim's 1.0 release. Personally I think those people are fucking insane.
Forty years ago I was at a cross roads that would have led to me being a programmer in the gaming industry. Really glad I didn't choose that as the game industry culture is absolutely exhausting.
Honestly that game looks pretty fun, especially as a two player game. Just keep it after you beat it and play it with someone else. Or play it again at varying levels of inebriation.
Maybe not in this particular case: but what if you buy a game intending to get 10 hours out of it and after 1h you get greeted by the final credits. Shouldn't you not be able to refund then? (Depending on the price of course.)
Depends if the game set some expectation for a 10 hour long campaign or not I'd say.
That's the thing they always tell you. It isn't a mobile platform, people are prepared to pay higher prices but you need to set expectations with those prices.
If you're charging $15 for a game people are going to expect at least 10ish hours of gameplay, if it's going to be under that you want to be sub $10.
Although having said that I think I only paid £12 for Minecraft (about $15) and I'm probably thousands and thousands of hours into that.
I tried Buckshot Roulette on gamepass last night. That would 100% be getting refunded if it was anything more than 50p.
id feel like i got fuckin ripped off if it was an hour long, this isn't a complicated game and even with the low price id refund it. then again id never buy this game in the first place cuz i already hold that view point.
I have never refunded a game on Steam. But then, I usually wait to buy a game until it's been out for a while and usually on sale.
keep in mind, its partially overblown because according to the acheivements, only 7% users have actually beat the game of the people who kept it. the people who refunded shouldnt be that different than the average.
most of the people refunding are more likely people who rage quit more than people who beat the game in 2 hours
not saying its not an. ass move to refund but the people who refunded arent statisically the people who beat it.
hence exageration, as the majority probably never finished, and its more scrutinized on the people who did. When you bring up the refund rate, then a specific comment doing the refund, that's pushing a narrative to the passive reader that they are one in the same when only a fraction of said 55k actually have completed the game in under 2 hours.
If valve for example stepped in and punished those few that actually beat the game and refunded, the dev would probably get a miniscule amount back. (and don't get me wrong, I think they shouldn't be refunded) Then you go towards the question that comes up in the debate that are you really going to deny people who didn't even finish the game, a refund? If you are, that would just be another checkbox in the steadily growing debate between consumer vs developer debate
only 7% users have actually beat the game of the people who kept it. the people who refunded shouldnt be that different than the average
You would need data to show this hypothesis to be true, you can't assume it, the variables are not independent, that's the whole point being made.
while i can't entirely assume it, you cannot assume that the people refunded are drastically better than the people who didn't, especially when the dev puts out the 55k refund numbers. if hes going to claim 55k refunds, he needs to show that 55k (or a majority of those) actually beat the game and refunded in under 2 hours, else hes bundling a bunch of people who simply ragequit and likely legitimately refunded the game. The debate ultimately comes up because he happen to tie the 55k number on the same post as showing the comment that someone beat the game and refunded. Thats the equivalent of going somewhere, finding one thing to support your cause, and saying everything there supported it without actually checking.
But all games have a rate of refunds, including refunds due to rage quitting. Our null hypothesis should be that the refund rate should be the same as any other game (controlling for difficulty).
I don't know what a normal rate of refunds is, that is probably data that is out there. But if the refund rate for this game is significantly higher than normal, then we can say that SOMETHING about this game is different.
If we control for every factor besides hltb, and it's still higher, only then could we say with high confidence that the difference is due to people finishing and refunding. But we technically can't ever say that with 100% certainty unless we go to every person's house and watch them do it.
the game is intentionally designed around being frustrating, due to controls, and especially since it was designed to be done in coop, as it came from a period of time like carry the glass or chained together was. It's not like conventional hard game like thrown into elden ring with no souls experience hard, but intentionally difficult games like those in the Foddian category like baby steps, pogostuck and such. they're intentionally hard, and theyre intentionally designed to fuck with the player, far more than a typical game would.
Its a very similar vein as modern hard vs "nintendo hard" in the past because games werent hard to be hard, they were hard because of intentional design decisions to prevent users from renting a game and beating it, and to prolong game value
top 100 comments